Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Perhaps a 20 move rule.

Author: Roger

Date: 13:01:27 04/04/00

Go up one level in this thread


On April 04, 2000 at 00:00:41, KarinsDad wrote:

>It occurs to me that the example that Jeremiah gave us in that thread could
>still result in a loss for the KNP side of KNNPKNP. For example (and I did not
>check this with tablebases, I am making an illustration here and hopefully, I
>set it up correctly):
>
>[D]8/n1PK3p/k6N/8/6N1/8/8/8 w - -
>
>Now, even though this may result in a mate for white after c8(Q)+, it may take
>more than 50 moves to do it. However, the idea is that the knight at h6 could
>blockade the pawn until about move 40 or so, then it could come attack the king,
>then when the pawn is pushed, it could go back and blockade again for a moment.
>The 50 move counter would be reset since the pawn was pushed and then the knight
>could come back to attack the king again.
>
>Now, this probably does not work for this particular example. I just put it here
>to illustrate the idea.
>
>But it seems to me that the BEST play would take into account the 50 move rule
>COMBINED WITH the shortest mate, even if that takes longer due to reseting the
>50 move rule counter.
>
>If there are examples of this occuring within the tablebases (and I do not know
>that for a fact since I do not have them), it would appear that the tablebases
>are in reality a good tool, but a partially flawed tool (since it would be
>extremely difficult for a program to determine that it is time to attack the
>king with the knight, and oops, it is time to head back and blockade the pawn
>again).
>
>KarinsDad :)


I would support a twenty move rule. If you can't accumulate enough of an
advantage that you can't win under a twenty move rule, then my opinion is that
the game should be judged a draw, and that it's your own fault for allowing such
a position.

This probably would not eliminate the situation described, but it could make
them less frequent.

That would also make tablebases smaller. Maybe much smaller. I would definitely
be in favor of that :)

Raj




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.