Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 13:00:00 01/01/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2006 at 08:53:35, Uri Blass wrote: >I agree but I do not see a reason not to count qsearch nodes and the author did >not admit that he does not count qsearch nodes and it seems to me based on his >posts that he counts every node in his search so I was surprised to find out >that he does not do it. > >I did not want to believe GCP that rybka does not count qsearch nodes because I >assumed that Vasik knows more about rybka and I assume that he does not give >misinformation but it seems that I was wrong and GCP was right. Happy new year! Now that you have made this step, it's time to start wondering if Rybka is really doing something entirely different and new and has such a huge evaluation, or if we should see Rybka as a Fruit-like engine but with some of Fruit's weaknesses solved, and if it's really not doing anything really special. How much stronger do you think Fruit would get with a better kingsafety and a better extension system, and some evaluation holes plugged? As strong as Rybka? And why is Rybka's endgame so spectacularly bad in some situtions (but fine in others)? Is Vincents preprocessing theory correct? Was Vasik lazy regarding those issues? Something else entirely? Aaah, the joy of questions to which we will probably never get a reliable answer :) -- GCP
This page took 0.01 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.