Hi Ray,
thanks a lot for this huge test! This time Hamsters surprised me by playing better than I expected, maybe it's becoming a better blitzer? But anyway, I'm very happy with this result and I hope it holds in other tournaments too!
It was a pleasure to test I enjoy the FRC testing very much. One day I may branch out into another chess variant as well, but those have their difficulties.
I see no reason why the same sort of results should not be achieved in normal chess 40/4 where all engines use neutral books as we do. Don't know about 40/40, maybe Hamsters is a little better as a blitzer, I don't know. I may well play some games with it there, although things are very busy at the moment
Alessandro Scotti wrote:Hi Ray,
thanks a lot for this huge test! This time Hamsters surprised me by playing better than I expected, maybe it's becoming a better blitzer? But anyway, I'm very happy with this result and I hope it holds in other tournaments too!
Hi Alessandro,
in my opinion, Hamsters 0.6 needs to value its pawn structure more highly.
Hopefully you'll take this as a helpful observation rather than a criticism.
Keep up the good work you're doing with Hamsters.
Graham Banks wrote:in my opinion, Hamsters 0.6 needs to value its pawn structure more highly.
Hi Graham,
thanks for the hint, I think you are right. This part of the evaluation has not been updated since Hamsters 0.2 and is probably lagging behind. I will try to run some experiments and tune the values a bit up, we'll see what happens!