Author: Uri Blass
Date: 11:54:26 11/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 06, 2000 at 13:12:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 05, 2000 at 13:57:34, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 05, 2000 at 13:31:22, Thorsten Czub wrote: >> >>>On November 05, 2000 at 11:57:26, Andrew Williams wrote: >>>[D] rn1q1rk1/6bp/p2p4/1p1Pp2n/6b1/2NBB3/PP1QN2P/2KR3R w - - 0 16 >>> >>>thank you for the position. >>> >>>>I'm afraid my program isn't famous, but here is its output. It never >>>>considers that Black is better, although the score is falling as it >>>>gets deeper. I think I'll run this overnight and see what happens. >>> >>> >>>yes. the thing is not to find the move. the thing is: >>>how to evaluate the position ! >>>draw ? winning for white ? >>>better for black ? >>>how to evaluate positions where there is no material win ! >>> >>>> 1= 54 0 188 16. Rdf1 Rxf1 17. Rxf1 >>>> 2= 54 0 252 16. Rdf1 Rxf1 17. Rxf1 Bxe2 18. Nxe2 >>>> 3= 31 0 804 16. Qc2 Nf6 >>>> 4= 55 0 2228 16. Qc2 Nf6 17. Rdg1 >>>> 5= 35 0 8550 16. Qc2 Nf6 17. Rdg1 Nbd7 >>>> 6= 58 1 40623 16. Rhg1 Bf5 17. Bg5 Qe8 18. Bh6 >>>> 7= 39 5 181115 16. Rhg1 Bf5 17. Bh6 Qh4 18. Bxf5 Rxf5 19. Qc2 >>>> 8= 39 19 476616 16. Qc2 Nf6 17. Rdg1 Bf3 18. Bh6 Bxh1 19. Rxg7 >>>> 9= 38 59 1706262 16. Qc2 Nf6 17. Rdg1 b4 18. Bg5 h5 19. Bh7 Kh8 20. >>>>Bxf6 >>>>10= 24 417 12520722 16. Rhg1 Qd7 17. Qc2 Bf5 18. Bh6 Bxd3 19. Rxd3 >>> >>>the score is 0.24 ? >>> >>>>This is on a K6-2 300 which was a bit busy doing other things too. I can't >>>>comment on your views below, but one thing I will say is that PM would get >>>>crushed in a straight match against Fritz, Shredder, Junior or Hiarcs. And >>>>Gambit Tiger as well :-) >>> >>> >>>right. you can reach lots of elo when you forget about chess and just >>>count the pieces and search very deep. you can even outsearch >>>more intelligent programs. but is this chess ? >>> >>>the position above is IMO about chess. >>>its not to find the move. its to see in move 16, better in move 14, >>>that white is better and black cannot defend much longer. >>> >>> >>>i am not saying: ANY program that finds the move Rhg1 is a new-paradigm >>>program. >>> >>>but i am saying that programs of the new paradigm find out that white is better >>>and has winning chances. >>> >>>Thats what gandalf, cstal and most of all 3, gambit-tiger evaluates here. >>> >>>the new paradigm is not about FINDING key moves. Thats not playing chess. >>>it is cross-word. is cross-word-puzzle-solving beeing intelligent ? no. >>> >>>the new paradigm is not about finding key moves in positions that HAVE >>>a solution. the new paradigm is about finding a plan and evaluating >>>it as a chance in a position that is NOT solved. >>> >>>you see the difference ? >>> >>>A bednorz-toennissen test-suite has 30 positions, and the programs >>>havwe to find the key moves. its bean counting. >>>the positions are all won ! the key move is there ! >>>thats not chess, its solving cross-word-puzzles. >>> >>>the differenciation is not WHICH PROGRAM finds the moves. >>>there is nothing to find. you have to invent something. therefore >>>you have to evaluate for it. >>>otherwise you won't follow the idea, or ? >>> >>>imagine you have fritz and you think: oh- the position is draw, slightly >>>better for black. and then you lose the game. >>>brilliant, isn't it ?? >> >>It is not news. >>It is known that there are cases when programs are wrong in their evaluations. >> >>Here is another example from Nimzo-Shredder in the ICC tournament: >> >>[D]6k1/2Q4p/p4bp1/1pBqp3/1P2n3/P4N2/2P3PP/7K w - - 0 1 >> >>programs are happy to win a pawn with Qb8+ Qd8 Qxd8+ Bxd8 Nxe5 and it is exactly >>what happened in the game but white lost the game. >> >>I do not know if Shredder was lucky to be outsearched or if Shredder had the >>right evaluation. >>We can find out only by getting Shredder's evaluation. >> >>Uri > > >For reference, I get this here: > 13 2:27 0.65 1. Qc8+ Qd8 2. Qxa6 Qd1+ 3. Ng1 Qd5 > 4. Nh3 Be7 5. Qc8+ Kf7 6. Bb6 Qd2 7. > Qh8 Qe1+ 8. Ng1 <HT> > 13-> 2:27 0.65 1. Qc8+ Qd8 2. Qxa6 Qd1+ 3. Ng1 Qd5 > 4. Nh3 Be7 5. Qc8+ Kf7 6. Bb6 Qd2 7. > Qh8 Qe1+ 8. Ng1 <HT> > >Qb8 produces a score of +.38 Qc8+ is an interesting option but I think that Bd8 may be a better defence for black. Crafty17.13 suggests Bg1 after 1.Qc8+ Bd8 with evaluations of 0.33 pawns for white at the end of iteration 12 and 0.27 pawns for white at iteration 13. Uri
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.