Author: Eduard Nemeth
Date: 07:40:26 04/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 2001 at 09:32:10, Chessfun wrote: >On April 19, 2001 at 07:16:39, Eduard Nemeth wrote: > >>On April 19, 2001 at 06:51:26, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >> >>>8/8/8/6Np/2N5/Pk6/6K1/8 w - - 0 1 >>> >>>Analysis ChessTiger 14.0 with TBs (4+5-pieces) and 96 MB Hash on a P600: >>> >>>00:00:20.1 6,62 14 5162472 Ne5 Kxa3 Kg3 h4+ Kh3 Ka4 Ng4 Ka3 Ne6 Kb4 Nf4 Ka4 Nd5 >>>Ka3 Ndf6 >>>00:02:18.2 6,60 15 37335234 Ne5 Kxa3 Kg3 h4+ Kh3 Ka4 Ng4 Ka3 Ne6 Kb4 Nf4 Ka4 Nd5 >>>Ka3 Ne7 Kb4 >>> >>>This is draw (or a mate in 100 moves :)! >>> >>>Win move are 1. Nf3 or 1.Ne4 >>> >>>Eduard > >With all 5 men. > >ChessTiger 14.0 > >; 00:00:00.7 1. Score: 11.00 depth: 10 a4 >; 00:00:00.6 1. Score: 13.98 depth: 10 a4 Kb4 a5 Kb5 a6 Kc6 Ne6 Kd5 a7 Kxe6 >Kh3 >; 00:00:00.1 1. Score: 14.04 depth: 11 a4 Kb4 a5 Kb5 a6 Kc6 Ne6 Kd5 a7 Kxc4 >Nf4 h4 >; 00:00:02.4 1. Score: 14.16 depth: 12 a4 Kb4 a5 Kb5 a6 Kc6 Ne6 Kd5 a7 Kxe6 >a8Q Kf6 Kg3 >; 00:00:02.1 1. Score: 14.94 depth: 12 Nf3 >; 00:00:03.6 1. Score: Mate in 27 depth: 12 Nf3 Kxc4 >; 00:00:07.6 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 12 Ne4 Kxc4 >; 00:00:07.9 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 13 Ne4 Kxc4 >; 00:00:09.4 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 14 Ne4 Kxc4 >; 00:00:11.8 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 15 Ne4 Kxc4 >; 00:00:15.0 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 16 Ne4 Kxc4 >; 00:00:22.5 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 17 Ne4 Kxc4 >; 00:00:35.8 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 18 Ne4 Kxc4 >; 00:00:50.0 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 19 Ne4 Kxc4 >; 00:01:03.0 1. Score: Mate in 25 depth: 20 Ne4 Kxc4 > >; Analysis completed > >Analysis by Crafty 18.08: >1.Ne4 Kxc4 > +- (#26) Depth: 8/15 00:00:00 172kN, tb=1446 >1.Ne4 Kxc4 > +- (#26) Depth: 9/15 00:00:01 310kN, tb=1657 >1.Ne4 Kxc4 > +- (#26) Depth: 10/18 00:00:02 672kN, tb=5705 >1.Ne4 Kxc4 > +- (#26) Depth: 11/20 00:00:03 1352kN, tb=6550 >1.Ne4 Kxc4 > +- (#26) Depth: 12/21 00:00:07 3005kN, tb=12665 >1.Ne4 Kxc4 > +- (#26) Depth: 13/25 00:00:14 7215kN, tb=16920 > >(Sarah, 19.04.2001) > >Analysis by Deep Fritz: >1.Ne4! > +- (7.38) Depth: 11/20 00:00:00 178kN, tb=285 >1.Ne4! > +- (7.69) Depth: 12/20 00:00:00 317kN, tb=465 >1.Ne4! Ka4 > +- (7.72) Depth: 12/27 00:00:01 705kN, tb=1050 >1.Ne4! > +- (8.03) Depth: 13/21 00:00:01 947kN, tb=1426 >1.Ne4! Ka2 2.Kh3 > +- (#27) Depth: 13/27 00:00:02 1307kN, tb=1964 > >(Sarah, 19.04.2001) > >Analysis by Fritz 6: >1.a4! Kb4 2.a5 Kb5 3.a6 Kc6 4.Ne6 h4 5.Nd8+ Kd5 > +- (10.78) Depth: 12/22 00:00:00 671kN, tb=1108 >1.a4! > +- (11.09) Depth: 13/21 00:00:01 772kN, tb=1301 >1.a4! Kb4 2.a5 Kb5 3.a6 h4 4.a7 Kc5 5.Ne4+ Kd5 > +- (14.38) Depth: 13/25 00:00:01 1028kN, tb=1540 >1.Nf3! > +- (#33) Depth: 13/26 00:00:02 2017kN, tb=3109 >1.Nf3! Kxc4 > +- (#28) Depth: 13/26 00:00:03 2346kN, tb=3677 > >(Sarah, 19.04.2001) > >Analysis by Hiarcs 7.32: >1.Nd2+ Kc3 2.Nge4+ Kc2 3.a4 Kd3 4.a5 Ke3 5.a6 > +- (10.17) Depth: 7/17 00:00:00 118kN, tb=375 >1.Nd2+ Kc3 > +- (10.42) Depth: 8/19 00:00:01 177kN, tb=469 >1.Nd2+ Kc3 2.Kh3 Kc2 3.Kh4 Kc3 4.Ngf3 Kd3 > +- (17.13) Depth: 8/19 00:00:01 358kN, tb=827 >1.Nd2+ Kc3 2.Kh3 Kc2 3.Kh4 Kb2 4.Kg3 Kc3 > +- (17.13) Depth: 9/21 00:00:02 817kN, tb=2333 >1.Ne4 Ka2 > +- (17.90) Depth: 9/23 00:00:02 825kN, tb=2364 >1.Ne4 Ka2 2.Kg3 Kb3 > +- (#26) Depth: 9/23 00:00:02 828kN, tb=2368 >1.Ne4 Ka2 2.Kg3 Kb3 3.Kh4 Kxc4 > +- (#26) Depth: 9/23 00:00:03 876kN, tb=2491 > >(Sarah, 19.04.2001) > >Analysis by Junior 6a: >1.Ne4! > +- (7.24) Depth: 12 00:00:00 148kN, tb=438 >1.Ne4! Ka4 2.Nc5+ Kb5 3.a4+ Kc6 4.a5 Kc7 5.a6 Kb8 6.Kg3 > +- (7.30) Depth: 12 00:00:00 162kN, tb=466 >1.Ne4! > +- (7.60) Depth: 15 00:00:00 171kN, tb=529 >1.Ne4! Ka4 2.Nc5+ Kb5 3.a4+ Kc6 4.a5 Kc7 5.Ne6+ Kb8 6.Nf4 Ka7 7.Nxh5 Ka6 8.Nf6 > +- (8.11) Depth: 15 00:00:00 388kN, tb=1339 >1.Ne4! > +- (8.41) Depth: 18 00:00:03 2033kN, tb=6029 >1.Ne4! Kxc4 > +- (#25) Depth: 18 00:00:06 3754kN, tb=12051 >1.Ne4! Kxc4 > +- (#25) Depth: 18 00:00:07 4043kN, tb=13259 > >(Sarah, 19.04.2001) Hello! Thanks. But I have not all Tablebases, only 4-CD ROMs. All Tablebases are 12 GB great, and my harddisk is 15 GB great. In my opinion should a top-program this endgame too "without TBs" makes! And now this in german-speak (my english is bad): Ich habe diese Stellung schon einmal im CCC gepostet, weil "Tiger 13" sie auch nicht korrekt konnte. Christophe Théron hat sie sich (ich glaube) notiert. Einige Programmierer haben diese Stellung bereits in ihre Programme übernommen. Ein Programmierer postete sogar (im CSS-Forum) dass es "ganz einfach" (easy) gewesen war, und eine Arbeit von "nur 5 Minuten" (only 5 minutes). Aber der kommende Nr.1 Author (?) hält das für nicht nötig? Wirklich? In meinen Augen wäre das dann wirklich schade. Regards, Eduard
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.