Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Basics of Group Theory for Chess Players ( ca 800 words )

Author: chandler yergin

Date: 00:18:18 05/21/05

Go up one level in this thread


On May 21, 2005 at 02:48:48, chandler yergin wrote:

>On May 20, 2005 at 22:15:59, Robin Smith wrote:
>
>>On May 20, 2005 at 13:24:29, chandler yergin wrote:
>>
>>>On May 20, 2005 at 12:26:50, E. Nielsen wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 20, 2005 at 12:04:52, chandler yergin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Each move and its response is called a ply.
>>>>
>>>>NO!!! There are two plies per move. :)
>>>
>>>As I said.. a move and it's response is one Ply;
>>>a single Move is 1/2 Ply.
>>>Sorry if that's too difficult for you.
>>
>>chandler,
>>
>>You are wrong. I know of no one who uses the definition you are using. Not that
>>it is difficult to understand what you are saying; it is just that what you are
>>saying is not remotely correct. If you think otherwise, please site a specific
>>instance of anyone authoritative stating the nonsense you are spouting.
>>
>>-Robin
>
>  On May 20, 2005 at 12:26:50, E. Nielsen wrote:
>"NO!!! There are two plies per move. :)
>
>Do you agree with that Robin?
>I hope not, because it's wrong.
>
>Would you agree with this:
> Ply = a half move        12 Ply = 6 .. half moves for each side.
>A Total of 6 moves right?
>It's correct to say for example:
>The engine searched to a depth of 15 half moves, while some promising
>variations were searched to 34 Ply.
>I understand that.
>
>Chessbase chose the definition of:
>"One move for each side is considered one Ply"
>It was describing the analysis function and what one "iteration" was.
>That is also the context in which I used it.
>So, in that context, and if you check my original Post
>you can verify that.
>Now using that definition, then the following makes perfect sense.
>"The analysis module evaluates every possible move for a given
>position 1/2 Ply at a time. That is one iteration."
>
>Aside from that 'selectively' used definition to descibe a particular
>function, it is not used.
>
>Please review my original Post; my explantion as noted in this one,
>and your kneejerk, inaccurate, rude, ignorant, response, & consider
>who is spouting nonsense!

http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?426828



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.