Author: Harald Faber
Date: 03:57:52 08/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 05, 1999 at 06:01:51, Shep wrote:
>On August 05, 1999 at 05:46:45, Harald Faber wrote:
>
>Anyway, 5555 did not play the endgame well against Nimzo 98 in my Long TC
>Tournament B (10 min/move on P6-233).
On the other hand I (have) see(n) CM win endgames...
>>>CM6666 may suffer from the same problems (it is optimized for 40/120 on my 550
>>>MHz machines).
>>>
>>>My personal opinion is that for overnight analysis, a high selectivity is indeed
>>>the best choice.
>>
>>Also for tournament t.c.
>
>Again depending on the "effective" reflection time, i.e. time control _plus_ CPU
>speed.
>
>I will finally be able to put some more efforts into this area as I have written
>a little tool that creates CM position files from an EPD file (if anyone is
>interested, this is in Perl only (!) and will be up on SCCS next week).
>So I can now run several settings through some test suites.
>(But don't fear, this is not likely to delay the publication of the 6666
>settings. ;-)
What does it mean in Perl only? Will I be able to use it (Win95)? This sounds to
be a great and important utility.
>I tried 6666 vs. 6666 DEEP ("DEEP" has SS=32!) yesterday on FIN08 and FIN09 of
>the LCT2 suite. I ran each position for 3 min only on a 233 MHz machine.
>Neither program could solve either position; the DEEP variant search several
>plies deeper but spent only little time on any move other than the PV...
>---
>Shep
This is always the danger in using a higher selectivity: the higher the
selectivity, the higher the risk to miss some good move(s).
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.