Author: Ulrich Tuerke
Date: 03:52:09 10/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2003 at 06:33:39, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On October 14, 2003 at 05:58:27, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: > >>>... >>> >>>The version with all the extensions and checks in quiescence decisively >>>outplayed Tiger in blitz time control (5 minute per game on my PIII/733MHz), >>>while it got demolished in 1 hour per game time control... >> >>Doesn't this mean that the architecture of Tiger sucks ? > >No, it means that the architecture of Falcon using all the extensions sucks :) >Sometimes at the 4th iteration it searches as deep as 40+ plies in some lines, >which gives it a huge tactical strength in lower time controls. But the tactical >advantage disappears in longer time controls, and what remains is a bad >positional play with no decisive tactical strength. > >Although this results in a very good blitz performance on my slow hardware, I >believe in faster hardware the tactical advantage will be insignificant even in >blitz time controls. Come on, Omid. You shouldn't sabotage my attempt to "pull Chris' leg" a bit. -:) BTW i guess that Falcon is the successor of Genesis, is it a complete re-design ? And it's really outplaying CT at Blitz ? Regards, Uli > > >>Looks like it plays strong on longer time controls and looses on blitz. >> >>Uli >> >>>...
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.