Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess Tiger 13.0 without tablebases (a test position) !

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 13:51:58 11/15/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 15, 2000 at 16:33:55, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On November 15, 2000 at 13:04:05, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On November 15, 2000 at 12:56:21, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On November 15, 2000 at 12:41:36, Peter Skinner wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 15, 2000 at 11:16:24, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On November 15, 2000 at 11:12:30, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On November 15, 2000 at 09:52:03, Eduard Nemeth wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This position is real from a game ( but not from Tiger ) !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[D]8/8/8/6Np/2N5/Pk6/6K1/8 w - a3 0 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In this position played a old version from Fritz 5 (Fritz-Nemeth) Ne5?
>>>>>>>And the game was draw ! :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I give now this position Tiger 13.0 for test an Tiger 13.0 played Ne5 ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(With tablebases Tiger how about better)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Eduard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ne4 is a mate in 26, of course.  But a program that doesn't
>>>>>>support tablebases is probably not going to have a clue here.
>>>>>
>>>>>Junior5.9 without tablebase have no problem to find Ne4 with +4.08 score in a
>>>>>short time.
>>>>>
>>>>>Uri
>>>>
>>>>Engine version   : Rebel Century 2.01
>>>>Hash table size  :  28 Mb
>>>>
>>>>8/8/8/6Np/2N5/Pk6/6K1/8 w - -
>>>>
>>>>00:00  01.01  3.13  1.Ne4 Kxc4
>>>>00:00  02.00  3.13  1.Ne4 Kxc4
>>>>00:00  02.15  3.13  1.Ne5
>>>>00:00  02.16  3.13  1.Nd6
>>>>00:00  02.17  3.13  1.Ne3
>>>>00:00  02.20  3.13  1.Nb6
>>>>00:00  02.21  3.13  1.Nb2
>>>>00:00  03.00  3.35  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.a4
>>>>00:00  04.00  3.05  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.Kh3 Kb5
>>>>00:00  04.01  3.05  1.Kg3
>>>>00:02  05.00  3.05  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.Nf6 h4 3.a4
>>>>00:03  05.01  3.05  1.Kg3
>>>>00:03  05.02  3.12  1.Ne6 Kxc4 2.Nf4 h4 3.a4
>>>>00:05  06.00  2.71  1.Ne6 Kxc4 2.Nc7 Kb3 3.Nb5 h4
>>>>00:06  06.01  2.85  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.Nd2+ Kb5 3.Kg3 Ka4
>>>>00:07  06.03  2.85  1.Kg3
>>>>00:11  07.00  2.91  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.Nd2+ Kb5 3.Kg3 Ka4 4.Nc4
>>>>00:27  08.00  2.90  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.Nd2+ Kb5 3.Kg3 Ka4 4.Nc4 Kb5 5.Nd6 Ka4
>>>>01:15  09.00  2.79  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.a4 Kb4 3.Nc3 Ka5 4.Kh3 Kb4 5.Kg3
>>>>02:24  10.00  3.66  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.a4 Kd5 3.Nc3 Kc6 4.Kh3 Kd7 5.a5 Kd6
>>>>02:26  11.00  4.12  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.a4 Kd5 3.Nc3+ Kd4 4.Kh3 Ke5 5.a5 Kd6 6.a6
>>>>02:31  12.00  4.80  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.a4 Kd5 3.Nc3+ Kd4 4.Kh3 Kc5 5.Kh4 Kc4 6.Kxh5
>>>>Kb4
>>>>02:40  13.00  4.81  1.Ne4 Kxc4 2.a4 Kd5 3.Nc3+ Kd4 4.Kh3 Kc5 5.Kg2 Kb4 6.Kh3 Kc5
>>>>7.Kg2 Kb4 8.Kh3
>>>>
>>>>Rebel Tiger 13.0
>>>>
>>>>Move: Nd2+  (3/22)  depth=16
>>>>Score: 6.62   depth: 16
>>>>Ne4 Kxa3 Kh3 h4 Ng6 Kb4 Nh7 Ka3 Ne5 Ka4 Nf6 Ka3 Nfg4 Ka4 Nd7 Kb4
>>>>
>>>>Tiger takes nearly 1.5 mins to find Ne4, yet Rebel 2.01 analysis engine in the
>>>>Rebel 11.0 package finds Ne4 instantly.
>>>
>>>
>>>Try them against a tablebase program to see if they can _win_ the position.
>>>It is not easy.  The eval of +4 shows they likely don't understand...
>>
>>Evaluation of +4 is usually a win and the opponent is not important.
>
>Not when one side has two knights and the other has a single pawn.  Many
>programs don't call KNNK a draw.  they call it +6 or more.  And I can
>guarantee you it won't win. :)
>
>
>
>>
>>Some programs with no tablebases know that KNN vs KP is often a draw so they
>>have no problem not to evaluate KNN vs KP as a big advantage for white.
>
>The game he posted had +4.  That isn't close to a draw, nor is it close to
>a mate.  Which means the program really really doesn't know what it is into,
>most likely.

programs that believe that KNN vs K is a win evaluate the original position as
+6 and not +4.

The fact that some programs without tablebases can see +4 suggests that they
have no problem to win.

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.