Author: blass uri
Date: 23:11:20 02/12/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 1999 at 22:09:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 12, 1999 at 12:18:29, James B. Shearer wrote: > >>On February 12, 1999 at 10:19:27, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >> >> >>>it has a definite strength advantage. Because if you predict well, and >>>50% of your moves are 'zero time moves' then the program has become 2x >>>faster, because it gets twice as long to search. And 2x is a measurable >>>speed increase... >> >> That should be 1.5 times faster. You are effectively using .5 of your >>opponents time as well as yours. Your argument above is wrong because you only >>get twice as long to search for half your moves. >> James B. Shearer > > >not if you do it right. IE if I _know_ I am thinking on my opponent's time, >I can use that time before I save it. As I do right now in fact, because >I don't want to get to move 40 (time control) with a lot of time left over, >and I don't want to have 30 minutes to burn on move 40 when that is usually >an endgame position. > >But think about the simple math. If on 1/2 of the moves, I get a reply >instantly, that really boosts my time, by 50% if I only predict 50%. Against >computers I usually get more like 75%. But when I mis-predict, they usually >get it right so they start saving time and not me... as even when I predict >right, I have to use the normal amount of time overall... You ignore the fact that you cannot use the permanent brain to be 2 times faster in your opponent's time. Playing without permanent brain is similiar to having 50% less time with permanent brain (assuming you predict 50% of the moves) Playing without permanent brain is not similiar to being 50% slower with permanent brain because if you are 50% slower then you are 50% slower also in the opponent's time. Uri
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.