Author: Chessfun
Date: 16:39:17 08/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 10, 2000 at 18:08:01, Peter Skinner wrote: >On August 10, 2000 at 18:01:54, Christoph Fieberg wrote: > >>On August 10, 2000 at 17:46:30, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 10, 2000 at 17:22:58, Wayne Lowrance wrote: >>> >>>>On August 10, 2000 at 16:17:47, Christoph Fieberg wrote: >>... >>>>>Fritz 6 reached depth 5 after 9 hours!! (on Pentium III, 500 MHz, 32 MB Hash) He >>>>>showed 61. Dxe4 Txe4 62. dxe4 Lxc5 3. Txg4 hxg4 as best moves (+1.56 for White). >>>>>What is the best move? >>>>> >>>>>Christoph >>>> >>>>nine hours to get to depth _five_ ? hard to understand. I think something is >>>>wrong. >>> >>>It is very easy to understand. >>>If a program does a lot of extensions it need 9 hours to get to depth 5. >>> >>>The position that was posted is a position when some programs do a lot of >>>extensions because there are a lot of possible captures. >>> >>>The position is not position from a practical game and I do not know about cases >>>when there were so many captures in a practical games. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Interesting question. What practical game had the position with the most >>possible captures? >> >>I would also dare to say that the position I invented is very close to the >>absolut maximum. Who can invent a position where Fritz would need even more time >>to reach depth 5? >> >>Christoph > >My Fritz 5.32 took less than 10 seconds to find the mate, and Hiarcs took 5 >seconds, Fritz 6 took 8 seconds, Junior 6 took 18 seconds, Nimzo 7.32 found it >almost immediately. > >Something must be wrong with your program. I only tried a few engs.....F6 no....F5.32 no...H732 instantly Junior 6 instantly. Thanks
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.