Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:35:20 02/23/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 23, 2006 at 17:17:16, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >On February 23, 2006 at 15:26:05, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On February 23, 2006 at 01:53:58, Gabor Szots wrote: >> >>>I am just curious whether it is so extremely hard to implement underpromotions >>>in a program. Vasik Propaganda Rajlich put up a poll at his site, allegedly in >>>order to "Help us make the products that you want". The people here _want >>>underpromotions_ but, although promised several times, Rybka is still incapable >>>of it. Now is it really important for him what the masses want but the task is >>>simply too hard? >> >>It's not hard, but it has a cost. >> >>If you compute underpromotions, it will make your search and move generator >>slower, since they will have to do more work. >> >>So, if you implement it, it will take some effort to make your chess program >>keep its efficiency. Since underpromotions are rare in real games, the chances >>are very good you will make your program a little bit weaker so that it can >>solve some rarely occurring positions. > >An serious Chess Player should have in his engine underpromotion for his >analyses, Point! > >All TOP programs have it implement. Except for the strongest engine in the world. So it must not be that important, if it does not affect game play enough to render Rybak weak. OK, OK, I Know you want the right answers when you ask a question when analyzing. Even patzers like me want the same thing. But for engine verses engine competition it is apparent that the lack of underpromotion causes problems only rarely.
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.