Author: Dagh Nielsen
Date: 01:07:38 11/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 15, 2005 at 03:27:41, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 15, 2005 at 02:56:54, Timothy J. Frohlick wrote: > >>Jorge, >> >>You are correct about the rating differences. I find that Fruit plays stronger >>at short blitz games because it searches faster. > >or maybe because it evaluates better >How do you know if it is because of search or evaluation? > >Note that it is possible that better evaluation may be effective in blitz when >at longer time control it may be less effective because search may find the >right moves. > >Uri Also, good search remains important at long time controls for another reason: the branching factor. If a program has a low branching factor, it may "outcalculate" an opponent by going deeper as time goes on. I remember the Zappa author write something like this, that he had spent much effort on getting the branching factor low, and so he guessed that Zappa advantage would be higher at longer time controls. Anthony can of course clarify if he likes, I'm just writing from memory. In my own experience, relative program strengths simply do not depend much on time control. I would be surpriced whenever I saw a relative difference higher than 20-30 ELO points. The CEGT rating lists for blitz and 40/40 seem to confirm this.
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.