Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 04:20:14 11/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2000 at 21:46:55, Dann Corbit wrote: >This position seems to have about the same eval at the given depth as other >programs find for b6+ so I was wondering if it is another equally good solution: >[D]8/k1b5/P4p2/1Pp2p1p/K1P2P1P/8/3B4/8 w - - bm b6+; id "WAC.100"; Analysis by Gandalf 4.32: 1.Be3 Bb6 +- (2.67) Depth: 2 00:00:00 1.Be3 Bb6 2.Bf2 +- (2.65) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1.Bc1 +- (2.68) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1.Bc1 Bb6 2.Bb2 +- (2.70) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1.Bc1 Bb8 2.Be3 Kb6 +- (2.64) Depth: 4 00:00:00 1.Bc1 Bb8 2.Bd2 Bc7 +- (2.67) Depth: 5 00:00:00 1kN 1.Bc1 Bb8 2.Bd2 Bc7 +- (2.70) Depth: 6 00:00:00 2kN 1.Bc1 Bb8 2.Bd2 Kb6 3.Be3 Bd6 4.Bd2 +- (2.68) Depth: 7 00:00:00 5kN 1.Bc1 Bb8 2.Bd2 Kb6 3.Be3 Bd6 4.Bd2 Bb8 +- (2.68) Depth: 8 00:00:00 11kN 1.Bc1 Bb8 2.Bd2 Kb6 3.Be3 Bd6 4.Bc1 Bb8 5.Be3 +- (2.68) Depth: 9 00:00:00 20kN 1.Be3 +- (2.72) Depth: 9 00:00:00 20kN 1.Be3 Bb6 2.Bf2 Kb8 3.Be1 Bc7 4.Ba5 Bxf4 5.b6 +- (3.07) Depth: 9 00:00:00 20kN 1.Be3 Bd6 2.Bf2 Kb6 3.Bg1 Ka7 4.Be3 Kb6 5.Bd2 Bb8 +- (2.68) Depth: 10 00:00:00 65kN 1.Be3 Bd6 2.Ka5 Bc7+ 3.b6+ Bxb6+ 4.Kb5 Bc7 5.Bxc5+ Ka8 +- (2.97) Depth: 11 00:00:00 129kN 1.Be3 Bd6 2.Ka5 Bc7+ 3.b6+ Bxb6+ 4.Kb5 Bc7 5.Bxc5+ Ka8 +- (3.15) Depth: 12 00:00:01 227kN 1.Be3 Bd6 2.Ka5 Bc7+ 3.b6+ Bxb6+ 4.Kb5 Bc7 5.Bxc5+ Ka8 +- (2.89) Depth: 13 00:00:01 471kN 1.b6+ +- (2.75) Depth: 16 00:00:27 7100kN 1.b6+ Bxb6 2.Kb5 Bc7 3.Be3 Bb8 4.Bxc5+ Ka8 5.Be3 Bc7 +- (3.26) Depth: 16 00:00:28 7400kN 1.b6+ Bxb6 2.Kb5 Bc7 3.Be3 Kb8 4.Kxc5 Ka8 5.Kd5 Ba5 +- (3.34) Depth: 17 00:00:30 8100kN 1.Be3 +- (3.37) Depth: 17 00:00:34 8900kN 1.Be3 Bd6 2.Ka5 Bc7+ 3.b6+ Bxb6+ 4.Kb5 Bc7 5.Bxc5+ Kb8 +- (3.50) Depth: 17 00:00:40 10400kN 1.Be3 Bd6 2.Ka5 Bc7+ 3.b6+ Bxb6+ 4.Kb5 Bc7 5.Bxc5+ Ka8 +- (4.06) Depth: 18 00:01:06 17350kN The other alternative seems to be Be3 as mentioned by Bob. The CB GUI won't cough up more lines despite claiming to be at depth 21, so that is why the analysis is limited to approx. 1 minute. >[D]1r3r1k/3p4/1p1Nn1R1/4Pp1q/pP3P1p/P7/5Q1P/6RK w - - bm Qe2; id "WAC.243"; Analysis by Gandalf 4.32: 1.Qe3 Rg8 +- (1.93) Depth: 2 00:00:00 1.Qe3 h3 2.R1g3 +- (2.04) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1.h3 +- (2.08) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1.h3 b5 2.Qe3 +- (2.09) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1.Qe2 +- (2.12) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.Qf3 +- (2.19) Depth: 3 00:00:00 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.Qf3 Rg8 +- (1.93) Depth: 4 00:00:00 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.Qf3 b5 3.h3 +- (2.09) Depth: 5 00:00:00 24kN 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.Qf3 b5 3.h3 Nd4 +- (2.04) Depth: 6 00:00:00 91kN 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.Qf3 b5 3.h3 Nd4 4.Qd5 +- (2.11) Depth: 7 00:00:01 200kN 1.Qe2 +- (2.58) Depth: 8 00:00:02 450kN 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.R6g5 Nxg5 3.Rxg5 Rbc8 4.Rh5 Rc1+ 5.Kg2 Rg8+ +- (3.80) Depth: 8 00:00:03 450kN 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.R6g5 Nxf4 3.Qf3 Nh3 4.Qxh3 f4 5.Qf3 +- (4.40) Depth: 9 00:00:04 900kN 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.R6g5 Nxg5 3.Rxg5 Rg8 4.Rh5 Rg4 5.Rxh7+ Kxh7 +- (4.96) Depth: 10 00:00:07 1800kN 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.R6g5 Nxg5 3.Rxg5 Rg8 4.Rh5 Rg7 5.Nxf5 Rf7 +- (6.14) Depth: 12 00:00:36 7200kN 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.R6g5 Nxg5 3.Rxg5 Rg8 4.Rh5 Rg7 5.Nxf5 Qxh5 +- (6.60) Depth: 13 00:01:51 23200kN 1.Qe2 Qh7 2.R6g5 Nxg5 3.Rxg5 Rg8 4.Rh5 Rg7 5.Nxf5 Rf7 +- (6.94) Depth: 14 00:04:00 52350kN >It seems that Qe2 is best, but I wonder how b5 would turn out. Might it also be >a winning move? Probably, but the eval is much lower. Even h3 could be a winning move due to white's advantage, but Qe2 is clearly better. Regards, Mogens
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.