Author: leonid
Date: 17:33:57 11/26/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 26, 1999 at 15:46:46, Daniel Clausen wrote: >Hi > >On November 25, 1999 at 20:58:09, leonid wrote: >>I have for you one question: Do you put in your moves sequence the moves that >>will check the ennemy king at the head of the line or not? And especially in he >>ply one? > >I don't treat moves which check the enemy king in a special way. One of the >reasons is that I simply don't know whether a move is checking the opponent >king or not. At the moment, I don't see any reason, why I should try checking >moves before any other moves. (If I would try to build a mate-search-engine >like Gustav, I would probably treat checking moves with higher priority than >other moves.) > >Kind regards, > -sargon To see why, you must look into the ply one. Ply that is just above the lowest one. There, for sure, in order to shorten the number of moves that you are forced to see, you must put your checking moves at the head of the list. Once all the moves that lead to the material advantage (checking moves could lead to the biggest material advantage possible) seen and the value that you have for this ply is already zero, or beyond, you can stop searching the moves of this ply. Otherwise you will be forced to see up to the end of all your moves for this ply. Some neutral apparently move could still lead to big material advantage possible. Don't be confused with the mate searching engin. Even if you don't search the mate, its recognition is present in all the logic that you use for positional move. Also in the ply one. 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.