Author: blass uri
Date: 01:59:56 06/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 08, 2000 at 22:49:28, Oliver Roese wrote:
> [Event "NRW 4er-Pokal"]
> [Site "Germany"]
> [Date "2000.06.04"]
> [Round "?"]
> [White "Grimm, S."]
> [Black "N.N"]
> [Result "1/2-1/2"]
> [FEN "8/4k1pp/5p2/P1p1p3/2Qq4/1P4P1/5PKP/8 b - - 0 1"]
>
> 1...Qxc4 ({This position occured last sunday in a team event. It was the
>last game. I and a team colleague of mine were "kibitzes". Our man had white.
>Obviously black is in trouble here. But black has the chance here to swap the
>queens and go into a pawn ending. He pondered a while and finally he played
>1...Qd6. The game went on with 2.Qe4 and finally he lost. My teammate took me
>aside: "What do you think about 1.Qxc4?" he asked. "Well, white opens the
>kingside with g4 and wins.", i said. "Wrong!" he told me. We made a blindgame,
>me playing white and he took me along up to the 18th move in this analysis. "I
>see.", i said, "But maybe white has some other possibilities." I went to the
>board, puzzled a while, and came back. "What about f4?" i asked. He hesitated
>shortly and showed me the winning line for black. In a few seconds he refuted a
>line that costed me several minutes! I went to the board again, trying hard to
>refute Qxc4. Eventually i came back. "What about g4, Kg3 and then f4?" He
>ponderd a while and then quick as a flash he showed me the refutation again. "So
>this guy is tough!", i concluded for myself. After the end of the game, we
>showed them what he had found. They were both surprised. Finally we were
>interested to see if there are any winningchances in the resulting QQ-endgame.
>Should i tell you who told us 19..Kc2 ? This is one of the few examples, there
>a skilled human can outperform current hard/software. If they can solve it all!
>I tried a few minutes with crafty, but gave up at the end. Can your computer
>come up with 1...Qxc4! ? Oliver Roese } 1...Qd6 ) 2.bxc4 Kd6 3.g4 ( 3.f4??
>exf4 4.gxf4 f5 -+ 5.Kg3 g6 6.Kh4 ( 6.h4 h5 ) 6...h6 ) 3...g6 4.Kf3 ( 4.Kg3?? Kc6
>5.f4 Kb7 6.fxe5 fxe5 7.Kf3 Ka6 8.Ke4 Kxa5 9.Kxe5 Kb4 10.Kd5 g5 -+ ) 4...f5
>5.gxf5 gxf5 6.Kg3 Kc6 7.Kh4 h6 8.Kh5 e4 9.Kh4 Kb7 10.Kg3 Ka6 11.Kf4 Kxa5 12.Kxf5
>Kb4 13.Kxe4 Kxc4 14.f4 Kb3! 15.f5 c4 16.f6 c3 17.f7 c2 18.f8=Q c1=Q = 19.Qb8+
>Kc2! 20.Qc7+ Kd1 21.Qxc1+ Kxc1 22.Kf5 Kd2 23.Kg6 Ke3 24.Kxh6 Kf4 1/2-1/2
This is not a good test position because programs can play Qxc4 for the wrong
reason.
Crafty wants to play Qxc4 but later changes its mind and the difference is
positional.
I believe that chessmaster is not going to change its mind and play Qxc4 because
it gives a big bonus for passed pawns in queen endgame and it knows that the a
pawn is very dangerous in queen's endgames.
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.