Author: leonid
Date: 16:28:05 09/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 27, 1999 at 04:23:24, Bas Hamstra wrote: >Hello Ed, > >>From one thing came another, I had a critical look at move ordering again, >>made some changes, did intensive testing and there it was: 10-15% faster in >>the end-game and 25-30% faster in the middle-game. > >Congratulations. I too notice that small changes can have large consequences. >However in some positions system a is better and in some system b is better. >What exactly did you change? Just avoiding playing HOOGSTENS moves? > >>After 18 years wrestling, fiddling and twiddling with move-ordering this is >>remarkable as I expected move-ordering was close to perfect in Rebel. I wonder >>how much improvement there is still left in move-ordering. > >I too. Maybe for positions near the root use ETC and sort accordingly? So play >each move, look if the resulting position is in the hashtable. If no cutoff is >possible, you could improve sorting failsoftvalues. This is something I am >planning. > What in the passage over signify "ETC" ? It is interesting for me since my move-ordering is very bad. Leonid.
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.