Author: Gerd Isenberg
Date: 12:02:56 04/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 05, 2004 at 14:11:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 05, 2004 at 12:27:50, rasjid chan wrote: > >>On April 05, 2004 at 11:05:30, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>Thanks, but I don't need to test yet as you have tested ! >> >>I think using nodes searched should be good. >>If a move fails low with very few nodes searched, it probably >>mean being rejected easily, so sort low. >> >>Rasjid > >Correct most of the time. Sometimes a move will have a high node count just >because there are lots of checks and extensions. But I've been sorting by node >counts for 15+ years with good results, of course forcing the PV move to always >be at the top regardless of its node count... > I use node count per root move too. What about following "enhancement": If PV changes, to store (some) "previous" PV moves and to use them early after current PV move, regardless of their node counts?
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.