Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: tablebases vs. evaluation

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 07:32:53 08/11/03

Go up one level in this thread


On August 11, 2003 at 10:08:22, Steffen Jakob wrote:

>On August 11, 2003 at 01:40:11, Harald Faber wrote:
>
>// ...
>
>>This is the same topic as with mating with knight+bishop. Implement or not while
>>the tbs solve it.
>>As a programmer I wouldn't waste my time implementing already solved and
>>available (!) knowledge.
>
>In general it´s not available everywhere, because most engines restrict the
>tablebase access in the search tree. E.g. they may not access the tablebase
>behind a certain search depth or e.g. in the qsearch. Therefore it makes sense
>to implement knowledge even if there are tablebases available.
>
>Greetings,
>Steffen.

I do not see how that knowledge can help for KBN vs K that is the example that
eas given.

You are right about other endgames like KRP vs KR because knowledge which
endgames are draws can help but in KBN vs K all programs gives the stronger side
a winning score so knowledge how to win the game is not important for the final
result if the engines use tablebases.

Uri



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.