Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 15:40:14 10/06/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 2004 at 15:13:17, Gerd Isenberg wrote: >On October 06, 2004 at 04:49:49, Peter Fendrich wrote: > >>On October 05, 2004 at 16:43:38, Gerd Isenberg wrote: >> >>>What, if best move after null is the reverse previous move, >>>like doing three alternated null moves in a row. >>>What can we conclude then? >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Gerd >> >>When this is happening and the nullmove is evaluated as bad, it's a "zugzwang >>alert". One idea is to re-evaluate the null move in order to find if it's really >>a zugzwang. If not I suppose it's not telling us anything special... >> >>/Peter > >Yes, may be the whole idea sucks. No, it wasn't my intention to say that the idea sucks! If we have a "zugzwang alert" something can be done. After a second thought I'm not so sure anymore that it is a "zugswang alert". We probable could see if there is a pattern by capturing positions directly from a search when this happens. /Peter >If nullmove is evaluated as bad, there might be better refutations than the >reverse move, which may accidently tried first with cut. > >I suggest, if nullmove fails high with reverse of previous move is best, to do a >(conditional) confirmation search and to do some extensions if the confirmation >search is less or equal beta. > >Gerd
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.