Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: WAC.230 -- is it Whacked.230 ?

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 06:00:41 06/24/00

Go up one level in this thread


On June 24, 2000 at 03:51:47, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On June 23, 2000 at 13:25:07, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>[snip]
>>Several months ago I posted some analysis from Crafty.  On Tim's EV6 it was
>>solving 230 in under 1 minute (it got 300 right on his alpha in < 60 seconds
>>per move.)  It took 16-17 plies as I recalled, but I did get a fail high on
>>Rb4.  I think my quad (at one point) took about 3 minutes to get this move.
>>I haven't run it recently, but it seemed to be correct (to me).
>
>Thanks to Peter McKenzie's graceful analysis, I actually understand this
>position now [there is hope!].
>
>I think any program that can find the answer in tournament time control is
>working a miracle.  _The pedagogic_ anit-computer position (puzzled me pretty
>well, too).
>
>1.  It is a closed position
>2.  It calls for a positional sacrifice
>3.  The benefit is *way* down the road.
>
>I am guessing that the programs that did successfully choose this move did not
>choose it because of a material gain.


I really don't remember the details for Crafty's solution.  However, I did post
the output here so it should be findable.  I only remember that the score jumped
significantly with a fail high at depth 17 or so, although that _could_ be a
positional sacrifice score gain, of course.



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.