Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 10:36:43 03/05/98
Go up one level in this thread
On March 05, 1998 at 02:09:37, Howard Exner wrote: >On March 04, 1998 at 20:04:43, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >> >>On March 04, 1998 at 12:31:11, Howard Exner wrote: >> >>>On February 23, 1998 at 10:58:22, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>>>No. 712 (Nxg2): >>>> >>>>This is bad: 1...Nxg2 2.Nxb7. A nice refuation on the opposite side of >>>>the board. >>>> >>>>Recommend: Drop it. >>> >>>yes >> >>Mine gets this, it thinks Nxg2 is best, but it is going for a draw, so >>this hinges upon a positional evaluation of the position, which is a >>case that I want to avoid. > >Nxg2 does force a draw. Also if white goes astray black could win. I'm >wondering now if a quiet move like Rb8 might be ok as it threatens Nxg2. >Out of curiousity how does your line go? I left this for a couple hours and I have: 1. ... Nxg2 2. Nxb7 Bxh2+ 3. Kxh2 Qh4+ 4. Kxg2 Bh3+ 5. Kh1 Rxe3 6. fxe3 Bg4+ 7. Kg1 Qg3+ 8. Kf1 Qh3+ 9. Kg1 Qg3+ >> >>>>No. 718 (Rxg7+): >>>> >>>>How is this supposed to work ? I see: 1.Rxg7+ Bxg7 2.Rg1 Rc8 3.Bxe4 Kf8 >>>>4.Rxg7 b3! how does white improve on this ? >>>> >>>>Recommend: Investigate. >>> >>>[FEN "r4rk1/5ppp/p2pbb2/3B3Q/qp2p3/4B3/PPP2P1P/2KR2R1 w - - 0 1"] >>> >>>1. Rxg7+ Bxg7 2. Rg1 Rfc8 3. Bd4 Kf8 4. Rxg7 b3 Note the big book >>>blunder >>>Bd4 missing Qxc2 mate! Drop this one for sure. >> >>Mine finds this, too, but the score is about equal when viewed from the >>root. >> >>The line it finds is 1. Rxg7+ Bxg7 2. Rg1 Rfc8 3. Rxg7+ Kxg7 >> >>If I let this go for a few minutes I end up with a long line starting >>with Qh6+, with a score of +1. If I follow it out, white ends up ahead >>a pawn in a QB vs QB ending. >> >>Not as decisive as I'd like, but there it is. > >You've made me reconsider this line. This sequence of moves looks strong >for white: >[FEN "r4rk1/5ppp/p2pbb2/3B3Q/qp2p3/4B3/PPP2P1P/2KR2R1 w - - 0 1"] > >1. Rxg7+ Bxg7 2. Rg1 Rfc8 3. Rxg7+ Kxg7 4. Qh6+ Kg8 5. Bxe4 b3 6. Bxh7+ >Kh8 7. Bf5+ Kg8 8. Qh7+ Kf8 9. Bh6+ Ke8 10. Qg8+ Kd7 11. Qxf7+ Kc6 12. >Bxe6 Qe4 13. Qd7+ Kb6 14. Be3+ Ka5 15. Bxb3 > >But being this length is probably beyond the scope of what is expected >of this revised suite. Is this similar to what Ferret and you are >finding? My mainline after 4 minutes had 12. ... Qxa2 rather than 12. ... Qe4, but that's way out near the end of the line, so it's likely to be inaccurate, the score is only +0.08. Next ply it scores as +1, it expects 5. ... Rc5 rather than 5. ... b3, but this is still 10 plies into the line, so if you go to the position after white's 5th move and start searching, you'll probably find something better quickly. But that is what mine saw from the root. It is a shame if the original combination is broken, but I like the idea of having very hard practical stuff in a test suite. We're going to be running faster in a couple of years, and these hard ones should drop down into more practically solvable territory. bruce
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.