Author: Peter Kappler
Date: 12:45:26 09/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 26, 2000 at 10:24:10, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 25, 2000 at 23:48:05, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > >>On September 25, 2000 at 22:26:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On September 25, 2000 at 21:03:09, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>> >>>>On September 25, 2000 at 13:48:30, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 25, 2000 at 13:21:34, Mark Young wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 25, 2000 at 09:01:19, Antonio Dieguez wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>hello! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I come to ask two things, please... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>What are the results of the basics endgames KRB vs KR and KRN vs KR, both draws? >>>>>>> if it is, there is some exceptions except the obvius? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>And can someone post some of these mate in n positions with n very very very >>>>>>>high? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>>Easy position to win!! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>This is wrong. _most_ KRB vs KR and KRN vs KR are _drawn_. There are some >>>>>wins for the stronger side, and even a couple of wins for the side without >>>>>the B/N, but in general these are dead draws. >>>> >>>>These are generally draws, but they are not "dead draws". I watched an IM Ben >>>>Finegold lose a drawn, but otherwise normal position in just such an ending at a >>>>tournament despite the aid of adjournment analysis. Ask him. I bet he remembers. >>>>It was against a computer and it cost him a lot of money. You must be thinking >>>>of KR vs KB, which is generally mindlessly easy to hold. >>>> >>> >>> >>>I didn't say "mindlessly easy to draw". I said "dead drawn". IE most of >>>the positions are draws. KRN vs KR is easy to draw as a human. KRB vs KR is >>>harder to draw but it is _still_ a well-known draw. Although there are some >>>programs that don't know this and blunder into it thinking they are a whole >>>piece up for about 50 moves... >> >>Ahem. I never claimed you said KRBKR was "mindlessly easy to draw". You're >>having problems understanding simple english. >> >>KRBKR is not a "dead draw". A good player stands a fair chance of losing that >>ending. Do you think you yourself can reliably hold it against Crafty? > >I'm not having any trouble with English here. "dead drawn" means "unwinnable". >Not "easily unwinnable" or "unwinnable if the opponent plays a perfect (and >difficult to follow) series of moves." > I have to agree with Ricardo. I think you're using the word "dead" way too loosely here. "Dead drawn" implies that there are no difficult moves to find, and no chances of getting swindled. You don't hear KRBKR described as a dead draw, because everybody knows that the drawing technique is difficult. Same thing for many theoretically drawn KQPKQ and KRPKR endings. The defender has to play accurately in these positions. I sure as heck wouldn't offer a draw from the stronger side of KRBKR. I'd torture my opponent for a couple of hours and make him prove it. :) --Peter >KRB vs KR is a dead drawn position except for a few exceptions. Just as KBN vs >K is a win (not easy for some of course) and KQ vs KR. > >And yes, I would be willing to tackle Crafty. KRB has a few pitfalls that KRN >doesn't have. But if you study the ending a bit, it is as easy to draw as it >is to win with KQ vs KR, for example. >
This page took 0.01 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.