Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 15:10:50 01/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
>I'm not sure what you mean. I've _always_ maintained that the best long-game >engine is not necessarily the best short-game engine. It is _possible_ that >is true, but it is not guaranteed. So taking a long game and reducing it to >milliseconds-per-move at the end can change the result and skew the overall >outcome. Or just turn it into a coin-flip as to who makes the first mistake >and actually suffers for it. The thought doesn't go that deep :) It might be that you're just testing time management. It is true that an engine can return nonsense in a millisecond if it has to. However I feel that the true strenght of an engine is first of all the ability to find a correct solution, secondly to find it in the shortest time span, and thirdly to find it in the time alotted. I.e. there's a hierarchy in determining what makes an engine "best". J.
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.