Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:35:51 01/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 14, 2004 at 04:06:47, José Carlos wrote: >On January 14, 2004 at 03:24:10, Jouni Uski wrote: > >>Many testers (specially in Germany) play their test games with x basic minutes + >>y seconds increment. What is the benefit of this kind of hydrid level really? >>I still prefer to play x moves in y minutes . Of course reason for increment is >>to make time losses almost impossible, but this is wrong way I think. If engine >>loses on time it's engines own fault and should punish for that end of >>discussion! With x/n You can count tournament time by estimating around 70 moves >>in each game. >> >>Alternatively You can of course play game in x minutes but still no increment >>needed. >> >>Jouni > > I can't speak for others, but I like to use 1 second increment because Arena >(doesn't happen to winboard) eats a small time fraction in communicating with >the engines. In case of a loss on time, I don't want to need to investigate if >Arena or the engine was guilty. > > José C. I do not see how it helps. There is always time when adding 1/100 seconds mean losing on time. If the interface use that 1/100 second then it means that the engine may lose on time because of the interface. If you are afraid of time trouble when the engine cannot avoid losing on time(I cannot avoid losing on time in 1 second per game if the interface add 0.1 seconds for every move) then x minutes/y moves is a good solution and you do not need the increasment. Uri
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.