Author: Harald Faber
Date: 11:10:54 08/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 11, 2003 at 13:40:03, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >On August 11, 2003 at 11:28:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 11, 2003 at 01:40:11, Harald Faber wrote: >> >>>On August 11, 2003 at 00:30:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On August 10, 2003 at 12:28:25, Heinz-Josef Schumacher wrote: >>>> >>>>>>So a senseful recommendation IMO is to play and test the programs either >>>>>"out-of-the-box" or with a complete set of tbs. >>>>> >>>>>Yes, it's my opion too. To test with the incomplete "Fritz Endgame Turbo" is >>>>>stupid non-sense! If the SSDF people don't have a complete set of 5 men tbs, >>>>>they should test better only with 4 men tbs! >>>>e to >>>> >>>>Why? A _sensible_ program can do just fine without complete EGTB's. >>>>Particularly >>>>when you have the case of (say) KXPKX, but you don't have the KXQKX table to >>>>encourage the promotion correctly. >>>> >>>>That is solvable. >>>> >>>>Since it has caused significant problems for many programs for a long time, it >>>>is >>>>something that deserves fixing. >>> >>> >>>Bob, it is always the same senseless discussion. >>>You say a "good" program solves this problem, we ask why? >>>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. >> >> >>That's not the point. There are two: >> >>1. You don't "implement" already solved and available knowledge. You just >>recognize that has already been solved, and avoid the trap of assuming that if >>you don't have the table, you can't trade into that ending because it isn't a >>mate. >> >>2. Any "problem" that is recurring, for many people, is a problem that is >>worth eliminating. This happens regularly, and it is _not_ difficult to >>solve, so that you can have the "pawn" table but not the "promotion" tables, >>and still play the ending reasonably. Rather than drawing. > >Point #3: > >krppkr (one of the most useful 6-men TBs) is ~4.6Gb >kqrpkr, krrpkr, krbpkr, krnpkr, kqqrkr, kqrrkr, kqrbkr, kqrnkr, krrrkr, krrbkr, >krrnkr, krbbkr, krbnkr, krnnkr together are ~40Gb, and I doubt that many of them >are useful by themselves... > >Thanks, >Eugene So you wouldn't use only some of them, would you? But that is what SSDF does.
This page took 0.01 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.