Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: To check or not to check, this is the quiescence question

Author: Tord Romstad

Date: 05:42:05 10/14/03

Go up one level in this thread

On October 14, 2003 at 07:17:27, Omid David Tabibi wrote:

>Actually it seems that it is safe to ignore all capturing checks altogether in
>gen_checks(). If the capture is non-losing, it will already be generated, and if
>it is a losing capture, the odds that it turns out to be a good move aren't that
>high (assuming that SEE hasn't mistakenly deemed the move as losing capture,
>while in fact it is a winning capture since one of the defenders is pinned...)

I think it is a good idea to use the SEE for checking moves, too.  Only search
checks which do not lose material.

Tord

• Re: To check or not to check, this is the quiescence question Robert Hyatt 07:06:41 10/14/03
  • Re: To check or not to check, this is the quiescence question Tord Romstad 07:31:49 10/14/03
    • Re: To check or not to check, this is the quiescence question Robert Hyatt 07:55:51 10/14/03
      • Re: To check or not to check, this is the quiescence question Uri Blass 08:01:09 10/14/03
        • Re: To check or not to check, this is the quiescence question Robert Hyatt 08:55:01 10/14/03
  • Re: To check or not to check, this is the quiescence question Uri Blass 07:26:20 10/14/03
    • Re: To check or not to check, this is the quiescence question Robert Hyatt 07:59:27 10/14/03

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.