Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:08:30 06/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 22, 2000 at 08:03:25, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
Diep is trying a risky attempt to win this 30 30 game now:
fics%
diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:09 446048 (62132) 10 0.00 Qe7-e8 Kg6-f5
\ Qe8-d7 Kf5-g6 Qd7-e8
fics%
diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:59 2660943 (388501) 11 0.00 Qe8-d7 Kf5-g6
\ Qd7-e8
fics%
diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:25 1067196 (117754) 9 0.57 Kg1-h1 g5xf4
\ Rc1-e1 Ke4-d3 Qd7-h7 f6-f5 Bc3xd4 Rc4xd4 Qh7xf5 Kd3-c3 Re1-c1 Kc3-b4
fics%
diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:45 2096486 (306860) 10 1.47 Rc1-e1 Ke4-d3
\ Bc3xd4 Rc4xd4 Re1-d1 Kd3-e4 Qd7-h7 f6-f5 Qh7-e7 Ke4-d5 Qe7-d7 Kd5-e4
\ Qd7-e8 Ke4-d5 Rd1-e1 Qb6-h6 Kh1-g1
fics%
diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:36 1808596 (418045) 11 0.45 Bc3xd4 Rc4xd4
\ Re1-d1 Kd3-e4 Qd7-e8 Ke4-f5 Qe8-h5 Kf5-e6 Rd1-e1 Ke6-d6 Qh5-e8 Kd6-c5
\ Re1-c1 Kc5-d6 Qe8-f7 Qb6-b2
fics%
diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:11 543162 (4555) 10 0.62 Re1-d1 Kd3-e4
\ Qd7-e8 Ke4-f5 Qe8-h5 Kf5-e6 Rd1-e1 Ke6-d6 Qh5-e8 Qb6-c5 Qe8-f7 Kd6-c6
\ Re1-e6 Rd4-d6 Re6-e7
Whether this succeeds or not, it's still a cool way to play chess like
this with white. No one wants to live like that with black...
36. Qe6 (1:01) Nfd4 (1:08)
37. Nxd4 (1:01) Nxd4 (0:06)
38. Qe4 (0:54) Rc5 (0:14)
39. h4 (0:45) Rc4 (1:20)
40. hxg5 (1:00) hxg5 (1:07)
41. f4 (0:52) Qb6 (1:07)
42. Qe8+ (0:00) Kg7 (1:05)
43. Qe7+ (0:00) Kg6 (1:03)
44. Qe8+ (0:00) Kf5 (1:02)
45. Qd7+ (0:00) Ke4 (1:51)
46. Kh1 (1:13) gxf4 (0:00)
47. Re1+ (1:00) Kd3 (1:01)
48. Bxd4 (0:34) Rxd4 (0:25)
49. Rd1+ (0:33) Ke4 (0:27)
{Still in progress} *
So basically i do checks in qsearch to let my program play a bit more
human. Otherwise i'm sure it would have chosen for Kd3 too.
I still feel this is a draw though
>In games versus crafty you usual can escape to a draw in open positions with
>queens, as it misses checks in qsearch. Take this objectively as that this
>is not a complaint against crafty, because on the other hand crafty
>searches non-checking lines usual deeper because of not doing checks in
>qsearch.
>
>The only risk i run with diep is that it wants to win too much in those
>queen pos.
>
>At fics old diep version (last linux compile from months ago)
>runs under diep against a crafty.
>
>Move diep roboElvis
> 1. d4 (0:01) Nf6 (0:01)
> 2. c4 (0:00) e6 (0:00)
> 3. Nf3 (0:00) d5 (1:40)
> 4. Nc3 (0:00) c5 (0:00)
> 5. cxd5 (0:00) Nxd5 (0:00)
> 6. e3 (0:00) Nc6 (0:00)
> 7. Bc4 (0:00) cxd4 (1:41)
> 8. exd4 (0:00) Bb4 (1:40)
> 9. Qd3 (0:00) Nb6 (2:40)
> 10. Bb3 (2:56) Nd7 (0:01)
> 11. Qd1 (1:43) O-O (1:18)
> 12. O-O (1:41) Nf6 (0:05)
> 13. Bg5 (1:33) h6 (1:31)
> 14. Bf4 (0:04) Na5 (1:16)
> 15. Ba4 (0:23) Nc4 (1:53)
> 16. Qb3 (1:18) Bxc3 (1:12)
> 17. bxc3 (1:16) Na5 (0:49)
> 18. Qc2 (1:15) Nd5 (0:01)
> 19. Bg3 (1:15) Bd7 (0:07)
> 20. Bxd7 (1:07) Qxd7 (0:04)
> 21. Ne5 (1:10) Qd8 (0:06)
> 22. Rfc1 (1:17) Rc8 (1:17)
> 23. Qb2 (0:00) a6 (1:25)
> 24. c4 (1:10) Ne7 (1:10)
> 25. Qb4 (0:00) Nf5 (1:09)
> 26. Nf3 (0:01) Re8 (1:06)
> 27. Be5 (1:11) f6 (1:07)
> 28. Bg3 (1:11) Re7 (0:12)
> 29. d5 (1:00) exd5 (0:16)
> 30. cxd5 (0:53) Rxc1+ (0:13)
> 31. Rxc1 (0:56) Rd7 (0:11)
> 32. Qe1 (0:56) Kh8 (1:32)
> 33. Bf4 (1:07) g5 (0:00)
> 34. Bd2 (1:31) Rxd5 (0:01)
> 35. Bc3 (1:33) Nc6 (0:00)
> 36. Qe6 (1:01) Nfd4 (1:08)
> 37. Nxd4 (1:01) Nxd4 (0:06)
> 38. Qe4 (0:54) Rc5 (0:14)
> 39. h4 (0:45) Rc4 (1:20)
> 40. hxg5 (1:00) hxg5 (1:07)
> 41. f4 (0:52) Qb6 (1:07)
> 42. Qe8+ (0:00) Kg7 (1:05)
> 43. Qe7+ (0:00)
> {Still in progress} *
>
>Qb6? Diep directly saw a draw!
>diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:21 950233 (96172) 9 -0.15 h4xg5 h6xg5
>\ Bc3-b2 Rc4xc1 Bb2xc1 Nd4-c6 Qe4-f3 Kh8-g7 Bc1-b2 Qd8-d6
>fics%
>diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:46 4915150 (1081413) 9 -0.12 f2-f4 Qd8-b6
>\ Qe4-e8 Kh8-g7 Qe8-e7 Kg7-g6 Qe7-e8 Kg6-f5 Qe8-d7 Nd4-e6 Kg1-h1 Qb6-c6
>\ Qd7-d3 Kf5xf4
>fics%
>diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:48 2237499 (417374) 10 0.00 Qe4-e8 Kh8-g7
>\ Qe8-e7 Kg7-g6 Qe7-e8 Kg6-f5 Qe8-d7 Kf5-g6 Qd7-e8
>fics%
>diep(C)(2177)[27] whispers: pv = 00:33 1446958 (247075) 10 0.00 Qe8-e7 Kg7-g6
>\ Qe7-e8 Kg6-f5 Qe8-d7 Kf5-g6 Qd7-e8
>
>I didn't see kibitzes from crafty. I wonder what depth crafty sees
>Qb6 is a draw.
>
>Vincent
>
>On June 22, 2000 at 07:55:53, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On June 21, 2000 at 11:12:23, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On June 21, 2000 at 11:03:42, David Rasmussen wrote:
>>>
>>>>I find that a lot of the games that my program loses, it loses because it
>>>>doesn't search checking moves in qsearch.
>>>>Anyway, how do people do that most effectively? I would like not to generate all
>>>>moves in the qsearch (just the captures), but then I will miss the noncapturing
>>>>checks.
>>>
>>>
>>>I did them in Cray Blitz, and in early versions of Crafty. But I haven't
>>>done checks in the q-search since just prior to the Jakarta WMCCC event.
>>>
>>>You can control them to an extent... ie when you get to the q-search, you
>>>can consider a check. But if you look at a capture at the first ply or 2,
>>>then there is little point in doing checks deeper in the q-search because the
>>>'stand pat' will allow you to avoid the checks totally, earlier in the
>>>tree.
>>
>>76% of all checks give a cutoff in DIEP in qsearch
>>on average a check improves score with 2.9 pawns
>>
>>But it's hard to figure out what checks to do and what you don't need
>>to do. It's simply hard work, but possible for everyone to do.
>>
>>It's hundreds of lines of code in DIEP.
>>
>>>I personally don't do them because I don't like the q-search at all. It is
>>>unreliable, and way too selective to trust. You show me a position where the
>>>best q-search move is a check (say a capturing check) and I'll show you a
>>>position where the best response to a capture is _not_ another capture, but
>>>rather a quiet move that pins or indirectly attacks something. The q-search
>>>misses way too much. I think it is more profitable to make your basic search
>>>better by extending in the right places, since it already has no real inherent
>>>pruning errors other than a lack of depth. I'd like to drive the q-search to
>>>almost nothing, as that would eliminate many errors.
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.