Author: Uri Blass
Date: 17:16:15 01/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 19, 2001 at 18:19:46, James T. Walker wrote: >On January 19, 2001 at 04:58:14, Uri Blass wrote: > >>I cannot post response because when I tries o do it I get an error message so I >>decided to post a new messages. >> >>I think that the game Deep Fritz-Rebel is not a good example of a win because of >>tablebases. >> >>Deep fritz was lost a lot before move 75 >> >>In the following poswition Crafty can see mate in 47 against itself at depth 20 >>after a long search. >> >>[D]8/8/pr6/6k1/KP6/8/5R2/8 b - - 0 1 >> >> >>I think that Deep fritz has a problem in the evaluation of the position and >>evaluates it as 0.00 at small depthes for some unknown reasons. >> >>Uri > >Hello Uri, >Can you please explain more? I'm really interested in this game/position. It >was not "Deep Fritz" it was Fritz 6. I don't see what you mean that deep Fritz >was lost before move 75. I did an error and it was It was Rebel that had a losing position against Fritz6 a lot before move 75. Fritz was playing white and won so where exactly was >it lost? Fritz was getting tablebase hits as early as move 55. That's why I >think it won. I think the tablebases help guide Fritz to the winning line. I agree that tablebases helped Fritz but I think that Fritz had a better position. I do not know the result without tablebases but I doubt if tablebases could help Rebel because it is not easy to avoid the losing mistake even with tablebases. Am >I wrong here? I thought Rebel should have drawn the game but made an error >around where you made the diagram. I thought if Rebel also had tablebases it >would have drawn the game. I am not sure that it could find Rc3 or Rc2 instead of Rb6 at the time control of the game. Programs with tablebases often need some minutes to avoid Rb6 and they have not this time at G/60. Uri
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.