Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Interesting position in the Comet-Junior CSCC game

Author: Amir Ban

Date: 22:55:11 01/02/98

Go up one level in this thread


On January 02, 1998 at 17:39:22, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On January 02, 1998 at 16:50:29, Amir Ban wrote:
>
>>
>>The first game Comet - Junior in CSCC has a challenging position for
>>computers, fit for some test-suite material.
>>
>>On the 43rd move, black is an exchange up, and can win another piece to
>>be a rook up, but this loses.
>>
>>Black manages to avoid Rxd3 on the 45th move, but plays it on the 47th
>>move. Which program manages not to play Rxd3 both times ? Is there a way
>>to win here ? It's not even clear to me that black can avoid losing.
>>White can play 45. b6 or maybe even h3 and black is in some trouble.
>>Also interesting is that white can save the piece by 45. c7 but that may
>>be the only way to lose :)
>>
>>How to evaluate black's 43... e4 ? Maybe one exclamation mark for
>>playing it, two exclamation marks for NOT playing it ?
>>
>>Strangely enough, white got a decisive advantage but then failed to win.
>>
>>Amir
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>I ran this and at move 45 crafty never considers Rxd3.  But it does
>believe that Qc5 gives black a significant advantage (almost +2).  First
>I'll give it's analysis when it is only allowed to consider Rxd3, then
>I'll give complete analysis:
>
>(these are run on my notebook with a .75mb hash, so this can
>be searched *far* quicker with bigger hash and a P6200 or
>something...)
>              depth   time  score   variation (1)
>                7     0.25  -2.87   Rxd3 Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 b6 Rd1+ Kg2
>                                    Rd2+ Kh3 Rd8 Kg4
>                7->   0.27  -2.87   Rxd3 Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 b6 Rd1+ Kg2
>                                    Rd2+ Kh3 Rd8 Kg4
>                8     1.08     --   Rxd3
>                8     1.16  -3.03   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Kg7 b7
>                                    Rd1+ Kg2 Rd2+ Kh3 Rd8
>                8->   1.18  -3.03   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Kg7 b7
>                                    Rd1+ Kg2 Rd2+ Kh3 Rd8
>                9     1.59  -3.16   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Rd1+ Kg2
>                                    Rd2+ Kh3 Rd5 b7 Rh5+ Kg4 Rb5
>                9->   1.61  -3.16   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Rd1+ Kg2
>                                    Rd2+ Kh3 Rd5 b7 Rh5+ Kg4 Rb5
>
>               10     4.82  -3.18   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Rd1+ Kg2
>                                    Rd2+ Kh3 Rd5 b7 Rh5+ Kg4 Rg5+ Kf4
>Rb5
>               10->   4.84  -3.18   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Rd1+ Kg2
>                                    Rd2+ Kh3 Rd5 b7 Rh5+ Kg4 Rg5+ Kf4
>Rb5
>               11     5.86     --   Rxd3
>               11    13.71  -4.43   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Kh7 b7
>                                    Rb3 c7 Rxb7 c8=Q Rb1+ Kg2 Rb2+ Kh3
>                                    Rd2 Qc3
>               11->  13.75  -4.43   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Kh7 b7
>                                    Rb3 c7 Rxb7 c8=Q Rb1+ Kg2 Rb2+ Kh3
>                                    Rd2 Qc3
>               12    45.43  -4.43   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Kh7 b7
>                                    Rb3 c7 Rxb7 c8=Q Rb1+ Kg2 Rb2+ Kh3
>                                    Rd2 Qc3 Re2
>               12->  45.47  -4.43   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Kh7 b7
>                                    Rb3 c7 Rxb7 c8=Q Rb1+ Kg2 Rb2+ Kh3
>                                    Rd2 Qc3 Re2
>               13     2:23  -4.46   Rxd3 Qxd3 Qxd3 Rxd3 Rxd3 b6 Kh7 b7
>                                    Rb3 c7 Rxb7 c8=Q Rb1+ Kg2 Rb2+ Kh3
>                                    h5 Qf8 f5 Qd6
>
>
>I then went on to move 47, and found the same thing
>as before...  .07 seconds into the search Crafty finds that
>Rxd3 loses badly and that move never comes back up again.
>Is it possible you have a bad bug to play that??
>

Huh ? Your PV at ply 7 shows black a rook up, yet -2.87 down ? Looks
like you evaluate the two passed pawns as worth almost a queen, unless I
am missing something. Of course, you had to do that to solve WAC #2.
It's quite correct in this position, and maybe the only way to handle
it. This would be very risky if applied too generally. What is the
formulation ?

Amir



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.