Author: Chessfun
Date: 19:24:22 12/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 2005 at 22:17:58, Jasmine Baer wrote: >On December 23, 2005 at 22:13:27, Chessfun wrote: > >>On December 23, 2005 at 22:10:24, Jasmine Baer wrote: >> >>>"is there any reason to select 6 minutes? instead of 5'? or this is just >>>arbitrary and which book?...thanks, bn" >>> >>>6+0 because that is a close approximation to playing a 3+0 game on a place like >>>playchess.com. Lots of people there like 3+0 games, and with ponder "off" I >>>figure that 6+0 is like playing a 3+0 game with each engine being able to think >>>during the other's move. >> >>Since you have a dual why didn't you simply play ponder=on at 3/0 that would >>then have given you your playchess conditions? >> >>Sarah. >Good question. I will be playing Nunn matches with other engines, some of which >are dual threaded. I felt it would be easiest to maintain consistency by going >with ponder "off." > >Surely you don't expect me to think TOO much? :-) Actually that does show a lot of thought. Running dual thread engines on a dual can be a pain to make sure they are set for single thread. Especially engines not identified as dual like Shredder 7 etc. I must have ordered my copy in some strange place since it isn't even due to ship till the 28th. Sarah.
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.