Author: Randall Shane
Date: 07:33:05 01/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
>Randy, > >I'd be happy to list your program. Couple of things, though. Your formula is >at odds with your f notes on the time-control issue, and your history shows the >fastest rated game played is 2 7. Normally, winboard-enabled computers will >allow a lower increment. Do you plan on playing with a lower increment? > >The other thing is, some people like to develop their programs for awhile rather >than always appearing at the end of the list. Up to you, though. > >Will Ooh, the finger notes -- I forgot to update them, just did it now. Thanks! I would like to play faster games, but I'm still not very happy with my time allocation -- but I've changed the formula to 3 <= etime <=13, so I guess 3 0 games would be okay. My personal preference when I am playing is to have some increment, and I guess I've (consciously or unconsciously?) carried that over to my program. I usually do a seek for 2 7 or 2 11 to make sure I don't accidentally match somebody else's seek who doesn't want to play a computer. Also, it's probably not going to be playing more than 15 games a week anytime soon -- it's my home machine, and I use it for other things as well. I don't mind appearing at the end of the list -- there's nothing like the good constant prodding of public humiliation to keep me working on improvement. :-) Besides, if I'm at the bottom, maybe other people with programs below 2000 would want to join in, knowing that at worst they'll be second from the bottom. :-) Thank you!
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.