Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:40:23 08/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 11, 2003 at 14:10:54, Harald Faber wrote: >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. yes he would. That is his point. If you try to use _all_ of them get ready to download a terabyte or more, eventually.
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.