Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 09:06:48 10/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 05, 2003 at 08:12:58, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On October 05, 2003 at 07:50:10, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>>Later testing showed that NORMAL was better . >> >>Really... well, your words, not mine. > >:-)) > > >>You lose a few games against Fritz, you need a stick to beat, guess what? It's >>Rebel's nullmove! > >i am searching the source for rebel making strange moves that lose the game >in an instant. > >first i thought: its the reductions. >then i thought it is the selectivity. > >now i think it could be nullmove. :-) Right, statements without proof. Weird moves can have zillion of explanations, the most frequent one: after investigation the move wasn't so bad after all, just a wrong human assumption. For a more likely explanation see: http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?319604 Now that is what I call proof :-) Remember that in the beta period Chris had a similar case no one could explain. Ed
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.