Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 16:32:37 07/29/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 29, 2004 at 19:06:40, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 29, 2004 at 18:56:12, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On July 28, 2004 at 17:39:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>I should add that I fudge near time controls anyway. IE when I get close, I >>>won't try to burn off my saved time. I just let it carry over to the next T/C >>>to help there. IE there is no sense in burning 30 minutes on move 40... >> >>I don't have that fudge. >> >>If that fudge was needed I'd say something was wrong with the time manager, why >>else would one want to save up that much time in the first place? >> >>-S. > >correct pondering and easy moves. All this is scaled with the available time in my engine, easy moves takes a certain percentage of normal moves, and with a lot of time left pondering will not be a full hit only sort of a half hit. I'd need to keep searching even on a ponder hit. >It is also logical to save time in the first place for other reasons. > >Imagine that you have time control of 2 hours/40 moves+1 minute for the rest of >the game. Ok that makes sense actually. >Is it logical to use almost all the 2 hours for the first 40 moves and to get to >a serious time trouble or maybe it is better to save 30 minutes so you can use >them after move 40? I think Bob would have problems anyway, because he said he only looked at it when he got close. You'd need to consider this almost from the beginning of the game if you don't want to burn too much time in the opening. However, I think neither me or Bob have or should spend time developing advanced algorithms for something which is as silly as that :) -S.
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.