Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 01:01:59 10/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 08, 2000 at 03:25:53, Peter McKenzie wrote: >On October 07, 2000 at 23:45:01, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > >>On October 07, 2000 at 22:51:43, Peter McKenzie wrote: >> >>>On October 07, 2000 at 19:32:18, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On October 07, 2000 at 15:16:17, Peter McKenzie wrote: >>>> >>>>>The position where the solution is most in doubt: >>>>> >>>>>[D]2k2K2/8/pp6/2p5/2P5/PP6/8/8 w - - >>>>> >>>>>The authors say that after 1.Ke8 Kc7 2.Ke7, black draws by 2...b5 with a >>>>>stalemate motif after 3.Ke6 b4 4.a4 Kb6. >>>> >>>>nice motif for humans. peanut for the computer to see. >>>>however, after 1.a4 i get a 0.00 score from diep initially, >>>>now there are sure some bugs in this version, as i'm busy rewriting >>>>its hashing to 64 bits (which asks for bugs of course), but 0.00 is >>>>pretty hard. it is basically doubting between 0.50 and 0.00 on most >>>>plies. where the stalemate position is 50 moves of shuffling around >>>>with king and score +1.31. this version not showing +3.x scores weirdly. >>>> >>>>what is the win with a4 which i'm missing? and 20 plies of search too, >>> >>>Lines given start with: >>> >>>1.a4 b5 2.a5 >>> >>>1.a4 Kd7 (1..b5 2.a5) 2.a5 >>>2...Kd6 (or b5 or bxa5) 3.Kf7 >>>2...Ke6 (or d8) 3.axb6, 4.b7 >>> >>>I don't want to type lots of big variations, but if you think Diep has found a >>>defence then please post it so we can analyse it. >> >> >>I quickly generated the following with assistance from Fritz4: >> >>1.a4 Kd7 2.a5 Kd6 >> >>[2...Ke6? 3.axb6 Kd7 4.b7 Kc7 5.Ke7 Kxb7 6.Kd7 Kb6 7.Kc8 Kc6 8.Kb8 Kb6 9.Ka8 a5 >>10.Kb8 a4 11.bxa4 Ka5 12.Kc7 Kxa4 13.Kd6 Kb4 14.Kd5+-] >> >>3.Kf7 >> >>[3.Ke8 bxa5 4.Kd8 a4 5.bxa4 Ke5 6.Kc7 Kd4 7.Kb6 Kxc4 8.Kxa6 Kb4 9.a5 c4 10.Kb6=; >>3.axb6 Kc6 4.Ke7 Kxb6 5.Kd6 Ka5 6.Kxc5=] >> >>3...Kd7 4.axb6 Kc6 5.Ke7 Kxb6 6.Kd6 Ka5= >> >>[7.Kc6? Kb4 8.Kb6 a5 9.Kc6 Kxb3-+] > >Instead of 4.axb6, the book gives the following line: >4.Kf6 Kd6 5.Kf5 Kc7 (5...Ke7 6.axb6 Kd6 7.b7 Kc7 8.Ke6 Kxb7 9.Kd7, 5...Kd7 6.Ke5 >Kc6 7.Ke6) 6.Ke6 Kc6 7.Ke7 Kc7 8.Ke8 Kc8 9.axb6 Kb7 10.Kd7 Kxb6 11.Kc8 and >apparently black is in zugzwang. > ><snip> Yes, that looks good to me. Proof that quick does not equal good. Oh well. 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.