Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 12:44:30 10/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
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 Hi Chrisotphe, this interesting statement was many times repeated from you, but in the meantime a lot of tests have shown, that there are certain programs (not all) which give different results at short and long games. Hiarcs i.E. is better at short timecontrols, for Rebel the contrary is true. I think one could easily tune an engine to short or long time controls (not that this is necessarily a good idea, but it is possible and therefore you can not a priori know if y program plays wiht equal relative strenght at all time controls). regards Joachim
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.