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 0.01 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.