Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:49:59 09/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 17, 2005 at 23:32:46, Ryan B. wrote: >On September 17, 2005 at 21:53:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 17, 2005 at 12:49:06, Ryan B. wrote: >> >>>I thought this rediculess theory was proven wrong with the Crafty vs Rebel thing >>>a long time ago. It is far more complicated than just the NPS loss in move >>>ording, pruning, reduction checks, and extention checks that all can improve a >>>program while reducing the NPS. As well what is known by the eval function and >>>how it is used can be much more valuable than even another few ply searched but >>>causing a very large loss in NPS. Hiarcs on slow hardware vs GNU Chess on fast >>>hardware should show a good example of this. >> >> >>What was proven wrong? >> >>We played exactly one game with crafty vs rebel, with the time handicap. Ed >>later played another match with a _completely_ different result (his chess 2010 >>or whatever it was. >> >>I'd say that shredder is clearly better than current crafty. Anyone want to >>give me 1000:1 time odds and play a match? >> >>Just name the when/where... >> >>I _know_ how such a match will turn out... > >Take null move out and I know the result as well. You might get shocked.... >again. I've not been shocked the _first_ time yet. And I also have no idea what null-move has to do with this. Should I also take out search extensions? The evaluation? Endgame tables? Should I just play using a text editor? Again, two programs that are reasonable, if one goes way faster, it will win way more. And nothing is going to shock that out of me...
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.