Author: Thomas Mayer
Date: 20:03:48 02/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Vincent, On February 01, 2005 at 21:52:56, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On February 01, 2005 at 16:44:48, Thomas Mayer wrote: > >Hello Thomas, > >[useful line left] >>Well, Vincent might be right -> anyway > >[the feeling snipped that quark is heavily improved] > >So i already wondered Thomas why you no longer were online at ICQ. I guess >you'll show up soon again telling me Quark will crush diep in Paderborn :) haha... :) > p.s. some other engine author a certain engine 'Z' wonders why Quark > statically > doesn't evaluate it as -8.0 :) maybe because it simply is not -8 ? Quarks eval is now clever enough to see that this is only around -2.something... as soon as you move one of the black pawns (of course not the ones on the a file) it evaluates it as -6 or more... :) Without any cost... :) I have tested with several bishop endgame studies now and always the same picture, Quark solves most of them quite easy with a very small tree and way faster then others... So this looks good to me... Greets, Thomas
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.