Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 11:24:26 04/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2000 at 11:39:51, Laurence Chen wrote: >On April 22, 2000 at 11:26:16, Laurence Chen wrote: > >>On April 22, 2000 at 10:51:27, Pierre Bourget wrote: >> >>>Is it true in this position that Hiarcs play Qf7+ ?? because of the tablebase ? >>>Isn't it a little ridiculous.Look here for Tim Krabbe opinion: >>> >>>http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess2/diary.htm >>> >>>[D]5k2/2Q5/8/8/5p2/5P2/5P2/K7 w - - 0 1 >>What's your point then? I do this type of move against a human player, there >>reason why I do such thing is that the human player is too stubborn to resign, >>hence, he is asking for humiliation, and wants to take a long beating. So why >>not!!!! I find playing against this type of position against a human player who >>does not want to resign in a totally hopeless position, then he deserves to be >>torture to a slow death. I approve Hiarcs move, it still mates the opponent in >>25 moves. A mate is a mate no matter how many moves. A win is a win. >>Laurence >I think you are both wrong and too hash to judge that Hiarcs 7.32 cannot play >chess. What if this was the 50th move for White? How many of you would not play >the move 50. Qf7+, any other move would lead to the 50th move draw. Because >this position is a setup position, one cannot assume this position starts from >move one. The same rule about setting up position with castling possibilities. >Take this position as an example: Qxf4+ would avoid the draw quite nicely, but if the queen was a little differently placed, you are right, depending upon the exact situation of the 50-move counter. Programs *should* handle that correctly. >Black King on a1 >White King on e1 >White Rook on h2 and h1 >[D] 8/8/8/8/8/8/7R/k3K2R w >And White mates in one !!! >Now the contreversy is castling, is it allowed or not, can one prove that the >either the Rook or King has not moved. >So Hiarcs take the surest and longest way to mate, and by giving a check it >forces the opponent to capture. I betcha you would say that capturing the pawn >is another altenative. Yes, true, but so what? It still does not mate the king >in the shortest number of move. This is my one penny opinion. A program could probably spot the fastest mate with search in this case, since you just have to walk the king over. bruce >Laurence
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.