Author: Ernst A. Heinz
Date: 05:19:39 10/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 27, 1998 at 22:00:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: > > [...] > >Simple. I do a *deep* search, and only do the pawn race evaluations at the >*tips* and not on interior nodes. I depend on the search to find the mates, >the ways the opponent can create an even quicker-queening passer... and only >after the normal 20+ plies of search are exhausted do I do the "race" test. Delegating the race evaluation completely to the search is indeed simple but actually far from satisfying (i.e., it is *too* simple IMHO). Of course, if you have already reached an K+P endgame you can easily do the 20+ plies of search. Yet, it is impossible to resolve Pawn races by pure search if you are on the verge of entering the according endgame. I know that all quiescence searches are full of errors but still I do not want my evaluation to return a premature winning score only because one side features an unstoppable passed Pawn which is not worth much in reality. I think it is important to do more than that in the evaluation in order to enable the search to find better ways for *trading into* K+P endgames. =Ernst=
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.