Author: martin fierz
Date: 08:13:57 09/06/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2004 at 10:59:22, David B Weller wrote: >Hi Martin, > >It wasnt actually an opinion, but more an attempt to understand why what Stuart >was finding, *might* be happening. > >Maybe because SEE is more often incorrect when it involves longer sequences? >[with illegal moves] so why not prefer a shorter sequence over a longer one? > >On Ed S. site, I remember reading something about always capturing with the >smallest piece 1st [even though the SEE may be equal - not sure if it was same >thing though.... > >just thinking out loud... > >-David hi david, ah, i see, i thought you had some theory why that should be better. my SEE is rather inaccurate, and i found that other (simpler) move ordering schemes work better during normal search than trusting my SEE values. i suppose that it has something to do with my inaccurate SEE though, i don't detect x-ray attacks :-( cheers martin
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.