Author: Vasik Rajlich
Date: 10:07:51 01/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 2005 at 05:44:21, Tord Romstad wrote: >I have played around with various variants of singular extensions from time >to time, but never had much success, even in tactical test positions. The >problem seems to be that the general search depth is reduced too much because >of the many stupid variations which get extended. When I look at my log files, >it seems that most of the singular extensions made are for recaptures after >obviously losing captures, like the line 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nc6 3. Qxh7 Rxh7. >The move Rxh7 is singular, but making an extension in a line like this >does not seem like a good idea. > >Do those of you who successfully use singular extensions employ some technique >to avoid triggering the extension in the type of situation described above? > >Tord Just apply your normal reduction for the obviously horrible Qxh7 (hopefully R==10 or so) :) Seriously - if we can solve this problem, we won't need to worry about SE any more. BTW - keep in mind that this case is somewhat normal. Statistically, moves with only one reply are on average much worse than moves with more than one reply. Vas
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.