Author: blass uri
Date: 04:36:20 01/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2000 at 00:14:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: >based on how little it was actually tested, and how conservative they were >in using the new hardware, I would think that with static hardware, they could >make it better every year for 5 years with no trouble at all.. I do not believe that their evaluation was better than the evaluation of the commercial programs. A complex evaluation can be worse than a simple evaluation if you do not use a lot of time for testing. I believe that doing a big evaluation without enough testing is not a good idea. They probably had a lot of mistakes in the evaluation so the fact it was more complex does not prove that it was better. Uri
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.