Author: Djordje Vidanovic
Date: 11:42:45 10/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 13, 2003 at 14:36:09, Jonas Bylund wrote: >On October 13, 2003 at 14:19:14, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On October 13, 2003 at 13:09:03, Charles Roberson wrote: >> >>> >>> You make the statement that Diep is a positional engine and you chose it based >>>on that. So, why did you run G/5 matches? At G/5 tactics and search depth >>>is crucial. >> >> >> >>I would like to bring to your attention that tactics and search depth are >>crucial at any time controls in chess. >> >>Showing dimishing returns from increased search depth is so difficult that in >>practice there is little difference between blitz and long time controls. >> >>If engine A gets a beating at blitz, expect it to get the same beating if you >>repeat the match with long time controls. >> >> >> >> Christophe > >Now that is not my experience at all, some engines do seem to be much better at >long time controls than at blitz and also the opposite is the case, however it >seems that engines that do better at blitz TC's don't have the same margin of >difference. > >Jonas Jonas, this _is_ an interesting issue, I admit. However, a very quick glance at the top section of the SSDF list will tell you that the best blitzers are up there, and the games played by the SSDF are tournament control games. I can draw a simple conclusion here. Naturally, there might be some conspicious exceptions... Could you please name a program that does extremely poorly at blitz and extremely well at longer time controls? Rgds. Djordje
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.