So what are the first tentative steps in this journey? It is my intention to create an engine alongside the discussion, although this will be private in nature, with a very limited distribution. Others commercial engines suggest “ideal for CC” without any real evidence to back this up. CorChess for example, gives a few optimizations related to CC but its overall benefits of this compared to Vanilla Stockfish are limited, as shown by testing. Some work has been done in the area before. This means that many of the SF optimizations, which bring great results as Shorter time controls, sub-optimize the engine for longer time controls. In CC we are looking for the absolute best move, whereas a normal engine is looking for a “winning” move. The reason for this is that the main objective for a CC engine is different to that of a “normal” engine.
Why are Chess engines not optimized for CC players? There are two reasons for this – firstly, testing for longer time controls is massively time and resource consuming (and what is called Longer time control in Stockfish testing is not in Correspondence terms!) and secondly optimizations for CC, would probably make an engine weaker in Short or very short time controls. Let’s start with a simple premise – Chess Engines are super-strong but are not developed to meet the needs of Correspondence players and this in itself is partial fuelling the “draw problem”
TESTING STOCKFISH CHESS SERIES
Today We start a new series of articles around developing a chess engine specifically for Correspondence Chess. Russell Sherwood Monday, October 11, 2021
0 kommentar(er)
