Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 09:28:33 02/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 2001 at 12:19:42, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 28, 2001 at 11:46:37, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>On February 28, 2001 at 10:54:13, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On February 28, 2001 at 09:57:06, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>> >>>>On February 28, 2001 at 07:21:44, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 27, 2001 at 13:35:33, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On February 27, 2001 at 10:49:29, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On February 27, 2001 at 10:07:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On February 27, 2001 at 08:24:14, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I believe that the drawish move was Qe3! instead of the Qxc6? Can somebody >>>>>>>>>post the FEN string that produce the graphical position for me. Plus I wonder >>>>>>>>>what program save the draw in the shortest time possible? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>None can see this. It is a 60+ ply repetition. Way beyond anything we can >>>>>>>>see today. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>We need to test all the programs in order to say that none can see it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Some programs like dark thought are not available so we cannot know that none >>>>>>>can see it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The fact that it is 60 ply repetition is not a proof that none can see it >>>>>>>because programs only to need the right extensions to see the relevant 60 plies >>>>>>>forward. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>If you are wrong then testing only one program is enough to prove it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>> >>>>>>Deep Fritz doesn't see the draw yet after one hour, but it's getting there. Now >>>>>>I am trying with Deep Shredder and I might leave one of them computing the >>>>>>position overnight. >>>>>> >>>>>>What has been the evaluation that came closest to 0.00? >>>>>> >>>>>>Enrique >>>>>> >>>>>>Comp Deep Blue - Kasparov,G >>>>>>1r6/5kp1/RqQb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P4P/6P1/5K2 b - - 0 1 >>>>>> >>>>>>Analysis by DEEP FRITZ : >>>>>> >>>>><SNIP> >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>>>> ± (1.00) Depth: 19/50 00:25:38 1907813kN >>>>>>45...Qe3! >>>>>> ² (0.69) Depth: 20/52 00:56:36 4195172kN >>>>>> >>>>>>(Irazoqui, Cadaqués 27.02.2001) >>>>> >>>>>I have let various versions of Crafty search this position for very long periods >>>>>of time in the past. I've had it return what looks like a draw score at around >>>>>ply 21 or so, and then at the next ply the score will go back up and the line >>>>>will change a lot! I never could figure out why this was. >>>>> >>>>>BTW, there is a good line posted at the bottom of http://www.rebel.nl/db2.htm >>>>>for this position. It looks like Fritz is following it fairly well so far, but >>>>>Crafty also looked to be following it when it found the drawscore, then it >>>>>changed its mind away from the line, and again the score started to rise. :( >>>> >>>>Same thing with Deep Fritz. What I find surprising is that Deep Blue expected >>>>46... Qxc6, when Deep Fritz, Deep Shredder beta and Junior 7 beta, for instance, >>>>pick Qe3 very quickly. >>>> >>>>Enrique >>>> >>>> >>>>Comp Deep Blue - Kasparov,G >>>>1r6/5kp1/RqQb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P4P/6P1/5K2 b - - 0 1 >>>> >>>>Analysis by DEEP FRITZ : >>>> >>>>45...Qxc6 >>>> ± (0.91) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Bc7 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Ke7 49.Rxb5 >>>> ± (1.37) Depth: 7/16 00:00:00 31kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Bc7 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Ke7 49.Ke2 Kd6 50.Rxb5 >>>> +- (1.44) Depth: 8/17 00:00:00 65kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Bc7 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Ke7 49.Ke2 Kd6 50.Rxb5 >>>> +- (1.44) Depth: 9/19 00:00:00 115kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Kf8 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Ra8 49.Rxb5 Ra3 50.Rd5 Ke7 >>>> +- (1.53) Depth: 10/22 00:00:00 305kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Kf8 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Rc7 49.Rxb5 Ke7 >>>> +- (1.56) Depth: 11/21 00:00:00 1078kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Kf8 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Rc7 49.Rxb5 Ke7 >>>> +- (1.56) Depth: 12/22 00:00:01 1597kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Rc8 47.Ra5 Ke7 48.Rxb5 h5 49.Bd5 Rb8 50.Rxb8 Bxb8 >>>> +- (1.78) Depth: 13/26 00:00:02 3199kN >>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Rc8 47.Ra5 h5 48.Rxb5 h4 49.Rb7+ Rc7 50.Bd5+ Ke7 51.Bxc4 >>>> +- (1.84) Depth: 14/26 00:00:06 6898kN >>>>45...Qe3! >>>> +- (1.81) Depth: 14/39 00:00:21 25200kN >>>>45...Qe3! 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Qe7 Rg8 50.Bf3 Qc1+ 51.Kf2 >>>> ± (1.22) Depth: 14/39 00:00:29 34959kN >>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 Re7 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Kg3 Qe1+ 51.Kh3 >>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 15/39 00:00:58 71272kN >>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>> ± (1.28) Depth: 16/43 00:01:48 133552kN >>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Bf3 >>>> ± (1.28) Depth: 17/45 00:04:03 301257kN >>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Bf3 >>>> ± (1.28) Depth: 18/46 00:09:44 723368kN >>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>> ± (1.06) Depth: 19/50 00:22:41 1678502kN >>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>> ± (1.00) Depth: 20/49 01:04:45 4818191kN >>>>45...Qe3! >>>> ² (0.69) Depth: 21/54 02:32:36 11295715kN >>>>45...Qe3! 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>> ² (0.31) Depth: 21/54 04:29:02 19961605kN >>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Qd7+ Re7 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 >>>> ² (0.31) Depth: 22/57 09:15:31 41587594kN >>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Qd7+ Re7 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 >>>> ² (0.47) Depth: 23/56 17:29:25 78776519kN, tb=3 >>>> >>>>(Irazoqui, Cadaqués 28.02.2001) >>> >>>Compare to the analysis of yace after few hours of playing against itself and >>>going back. >>> >>>1...Qe3 2.Qxd6 Re8 3.Qd7+ Re7 4.Qc6 Qxe4 5.d6 Qd3+ 6.Kg1 Re8 7.Kh2 Qxf5 8.Ra2 >>>Rd8 9.Qxb5 Rxd6 10.Qxc4+ Kg6 11.Ra7 Kh7 >>> >>>It seems that the lines are similiar and I suspect that humans did not analyze >>>this line to prove if it is a draw or not a draw. >>> >>>I did not believe that this traingle Qc6-d6-d7-c6 can be a good idea for white >>>but maybe humans are wrong and it is not a draw. >>> >>>It is clear that deeper blue could not find this idea otherwise the programmer >>>could tell the public that it is not a draw so practically kasparov could draw >>>by playing Qe3 but it does not answer the question if Qe3 is objectively a draw. >>> >>>Uri >> >>OK, fine, but obviously Qe3 is the only chance for black and Deep Fritz, Deep >>Shredder and Junior 7 beta see it very quickly. If Deep Blue was so extremely >>fast, why did it expect Qxc6 and didn't see Qe3? >> >>Enrique > >I believe that the answer is simply one of the following or both of them: > >1)Deeper blue is worse than Deep Fritz Oh gee, there we are again... :) Enrique > and could not see the perpetual because >it did not do the right extensions(the main line of Deep Fritz suggests that >Deep Fritz can see the perpetual after many hours so it has a main line that >avoids it) > >2)Deeper blue had a different evaluation and gave the line of Qe3 worse score(it >prefered to be some pawns down in opposite colour bishop endgame and not a >bishop down for 2 pawns with a chance for perpetual check) > >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.