Author: Paulo Soares
Date: 10:47:23 07/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 1999 at 04:59:23, blass uri wrote: (snip) >I agree that it may be a better idea not to give the computer a long time for >one move and try to follow the main line but I am not sure if this example >proves it. >Junior5.4 used only 976 seconds on my pentium200 to choose 26...Qb6 >I am not sure if it is going to choose Qb6 if I give it some hours per move. > >If you do not give the computer some hours per move then >there is a chance that you can also miss a surprising move that the computer can >find after some hours but I believe that you can earn more then you lose by >trying to follow some lines and not only giving the computer a long time in the >root position. > >Uri Uri, 976 seconds (aproximately 16Min) is a long time for this type of analysis, eu acho que esse tempo não deve ser superior a 3min para o seu pentium 200, para a maioria das posições. A probabilidade do computador perder um lance surpreendente é muito pequena se você considerar que para uma mesma posição você vai analisar as principais opções. Uri, 976 seconds (aproximately 16Min) is a long time for this type of analysis, I find that that time does not have to be greater than 3min for his pentium 200, for the majority of the positions. The probability of the computer to lose one surprising move is very small if you consider that for one same position you go to analyze the main options. It's tiring, but interesting. I abandoned the semifinais of the Brazilian championship of postal chess because I had two options: to work better and play badly, or to work badly and play better. I chose the last option, but my wife chose the first option. Paulo Soares
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.