Author: leonid
Date: 18:10:45 04/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 11, 2001 at 18:23:27, Paul wrote: >On April 11, 2001 at 18:04:15, leonid wrote: > >>Hello! >> >>If you are in the mood to solve one mate then you can try this position: >> >>q1rkr1q1/RQpbpQR1/N1qbq1N1/n1NBN1n1/1Q1B1Q2/1q1Q1q2/3K4/2Q1Q3 w - - >> >>Please indicate your result. >> >>If your program is shareware try to indicate its address on the web. > >Hi Leonid, mine found a mate in 8: Hi, Paul! > >00:16 WM8 08 Nxc6+ Nxc6 Qxc7+ Bxc7 Nxe6+ Nxe6 Qfxe7+ Nxe7 Qcxc7+ Rxc7 Rxa8+ Bc8 >Qxc7+ Nxc7 Qd6# > >>If you have the last version of Genius, please say me how it do on this >>position. Even if you will indicate its brute force time, for two consecutive >>numbers, it will be helpful. >> >>Was attracted to the Genius program after sudden appearence of "free" Genius 2. >>Many years ago I used it a lot. Program was really good in solving mate. At >>least, it was not a lair. But how is the last version? As reliable as Genius 2 >>but only more expedient? >> >>Thanks for your response, >>Leonid. > >I have (had) Genius 2,3 & 5, but unfortunately I'm in the middle of a Windows >reinstall, so don't have them installed right now and can't tell you how they do >on this position ... but they are good matesolvers, that at least I do remember >... :) Have you tried Genius on your kind of (crowded) positions? Genius 2 and Genius 4, for sure, don't care about any fantasy positions, like this last one. Genius 2 was able to solve every position without any problem. Genius 2 never did a mistake in any heavy positions that I asked him to solve and I tried on it more that few handreds. Genius 4 was not that good. In few positions (in some 25) it was wrong. It could be that it was the first version for Windows. This is why few bugs jumped inside. It could be that in the next version (like your version 5) it is already as perfect as I remember for version 2. Genius 4 is more speedy in solving the mates. I remember that Genius program was not that speedy but bug free. Rock solid in everywhere. I tried for last position only 4 and 5 moves deep with Genius 2. Pentium 600Mhz. 4 moves - 11 sec. (mine 0.5 sec by brute force) 5 moves - 12 min. 39. (... 3.9 sec ... ) I not went with Genius 2 beyond 5 moves because it looked like for this position it will be very long. This position is 8 moves deep, just like you said. And how is Genius 5? Did you ever used Genius for verification of mate positions, like I did when I wrote my mate solver? Salut, Leonid. >Groetjes, >Paul
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.