Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 10:23:29 10/21/97
Go up one level in this thread
On October 21, 1997 at 11:55:20, Amir Ban wrote: >The PV given by DB up to ply 10 starting with 36.Qb6 Qe7 37.axb5 Rab8 >38.Qxa6 e4 39.Bxe4 Qe5 evaluated +0.74: [snip] >1. The DB choice was based on evaluation. It is possible, and I would think extremely likely, that there is more to this PV than what you see. Eight moves is not a lot to return from a 10-ply search, so it appears to be truncated, and given their preference for expensive extensions, possibly extremely truncated. On the other hand, it would surprise me a little if a micro couldn't see as much after giving it 8 plies of "solution" for free. I let mine search for an hour or so, and still +1.27 (from white's point of view). >2. That evaluation was "non-standard" for our field. >3. The analysis does not prove cheating, but is no great help in >disproving it either. The status quo remains. I thought that this was going to be the primary evidence for cheating. If this evidence doesn't work, what other evidence is there? I mean, eventually someone is going to say that Karpov was making all of the moves, and the whole match is something out of "Capricorn One", and there will be no way at all to "disprove" that, will there? bruce
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.