Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: I still don't get it: time increment, why?

Author: Jeroen van Dorp

Date: 11:25:07 01/14/04

Go up one level in this thread

On January 14, 2004 at 12:59:37, Robert Hyatt wrote:


>If you don't, and the two programs are nearly equal, the result is almost a
>coin-toss, because when time is low, searches change.  adding an increment
>says that you can _always_ search for that long, plus whatever fraction of
>the original time block you want to invest...  you never have to play a move
>in a fraction of a second where tactics might smoke you...

I wonder.... with that, are you _explaining_ the definition of "best chess
engine" or are you just _redefining_ it?


J.

• Re: I still don't get it: time increment, why? Robert Hyatt 11:33:57 01/14/04
  • Re: I still don't get it: time increment, why? Jeroen van Dorp 15:10:50 01/14/04
    • Re: I still don't get it: time increment, why? Robert Hyatt 21:04:33 01/14/04
      • Re: I still don't get it: time increment, why? Gordon Rattray 06:59:22 01/15/04
        • Re: I still don't get it: time increment, why? Robert Hyatt 08:39:28 01/15/04
          • Re: I still don't get it: time increment, why? Gordon Rattray 09:44:08 01/15/04
            • Re: I still don't get it: time increment, why? Robert Hyatt 11:29:26 01/15/04

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.