Author: Peter Skinner
Date: 10:37:20 08/17/03
Since my last inquiry of the importance of tablebases I have run various engines on FICS over the last month, playing over 1100 games. In very few instances using tablebases did not change the outcome of a game ie. a loss into a draw, a loss into a won game. In almost 96% of the games, the outcome was pretty much decided by the time the 5 man tablebases were used. On FICS of course the time controls were of a fast nature, usually 5 3 blitz, or 30 10 "standard" time controls. The engines that I used in the test were Ruffian 1.0.5, Crafty 19.03, Chess Tiger 15.0, and Junior 8. Out of all of these, Crafty seemed to do the best whether it had the tablebases or not. Ruffian scored slightly under Crafty. Chess Tiger and Junior had very mixed results. Now while the tablebases due in fact let the chess program gain the instant moves needed in a fast time, I have found that without the access, the engine usually comes up with the same move in 96% of the time. It also allows the program to move instantly when it is searching the tablebases, thus in a short time control this can be of service. I have read many tests where others are doing the same as I am, and I have come to the conclusion that while tablebases certainly _can_ be benefitial, they for the most part are not 100% required. If anyone would like the games, I would be happy to email them. Peter.
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.