Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 02:17:47 10/06/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 2005 at 02:35:39, Dann Corbit wrote: >On October 06, 2005 at 01:34:15, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On October 05, 2005 at 23:05:29, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>This is ChessAssistant analysis created by Chess Tiger: >>> >>>rnbq1rk1/4bppp/p2p1n2/1p2p3/4P3/1NN5/PPP1BPPP/R1BQ1R1K w - - ce 38; acd 15; acs >>>1; pv Nd5 Nxd5 Qxd5 Ra7 Be3 Be6 Qd2 Rd7 f4 exf4 Rxf4 Nc6 Raf1 Bg5 R4f3 Bxe3 Qxe3 >>>f6; pm Nc3d5; >> ^^ This violates the standard, FYI. > >Every EPD processor that I know of violates the standard, even the one that SJE >wrote (there is no such field as acd, which turns out to be the most important >field in the record most of the time -- without information about the depth of >analysis, the score is meaningless. And time means little because 60 seconds on >a 300 MHz PII will get whomped by a few seconds on an 8 CPU AMD 64 bit machine.) I'm convinced that huge numbers of things are like this: 1) They look fine if you glance at them superficially. 2) They are pretty terrible if you take a closer look. 3) They work well enough that it is politically impossible to fix them. We saw the consequence of this recently with Katrina. bruce
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.