Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Bratko-Kopec

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 20:39:02 01/17/98

Go up one level in this thread

On January 17, 1998 at 18:29:35, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>Some of the Bratko-Kopec positions were like this, but there were a few
>that I disagreed with, Kmoch be damned.  :)  But they were nice in that
>deeper searches wouldn't help if you didn't understand the particular
>pawn structure nuance they were targeting...

The problem I had with some of the BK problems wasn't that the problems
had incorrect solutions, but rather that programs would find answers for
superficial reasons.  For instance, position 4, which is from Spielmann
vs Walter, 1928:

rnbqkb1r/p3pppp/1p6/2ppP3/3N4/2P5/PPP1QPPP/R1B1KB1R w KQkq - 0 1

The key is 1. e6, is meant to be a sacrifice.  The reply 1. ... fxe6 is
crushed by 2. Qh5+, but there is nothing in the test that ensures that
programs understand the consequences of 1. ... fxe6.

I bet many of the programs tested by BK over the years would not have
played 2. Qh5+.  Here is this position:

rnbqkb1r/p3p1pp/1p2p3/2pp4/3N4/2P5/PPP1QPPP/R1B1KB1R w KQkq - 0 2

How long does it take your favorite program to find 2. Qh5+ here?

Imagine how far beyond *any* micro this was in 1980 or so, but there
they all are, getting full credit for this problem, they all found 1.

My favorite BK problem is #22:

2r2rk1/1bqnbpp1/1p1ppn1p/pP6/N1P1P3/P2B1N1P/1B2QPP1/R2R2K1 b - - 0 1

The key is 1. ... Bxe4.  This was a very good recapture extension
problem in its day, but now you'll probably find it in a second or two.


This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.