Author: Joshua Lee
Date: 08:54:16 06/11/01
I wanted to try one of the hardest Nolot Positions also LCT with more memory now that i have an aditional 256MB on top of the original 256MB for a total of 512MB in which the max i can use is 384 but i don't think this is a good setting as powers of two are 128, 256 and 512 also i think even powers of two are better than odd powers of two 2^6 better than 2^7 which would explain why most people got better results with 64MB for hash tables under fritzmark than 128 but above 64MB the fritzmark is similar which i do not understand. My system is an 800Mhz Athlon with 512MB PC-133 and next time i upgrad it will have to be much faster than dual 1.7Ghz Xeons position - LCTCMB12 [D] r2qrb1k/1p1b2p1/p2ppn1p/8/3NP3/1BN5/PPP3QP/1K3RR1 w - - 0 1 Analysis by Fritz 6: 1.Rxf6-- µ (-1.25) Depth: 1/3 00:00:00 1.Rxf6-- Qxf6 -+ (-1.81) Depth: 1/3 00:00:00 1.Nxe6! -+ (-1.78) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 1.Qg6! ³ (-0.47) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 1.Qg6! ² (0.28) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 1.Qg6 Rc8 = (0.03) Depth: 2/6 00:00:00 1.Qg6 Rc8 2.h4 = (0.03) Depth: 3/11 00:00:00 1.Qg6 Rc8 2.h4 Qc7 = (-0.09) Depth: 4/15 00:00:00 1kN 1.Nce2! = (-0.06) Depth: 4/15 00:00:00 4kN 1.Nce2 Qe7 2.Nf4 Qf7 3.Ng6+ Kh7 = (0.06) Depth: 5/17 00:00:00 9kN 1.Nce2 e5 2.Nf5 Bc6 3.Nc3 Qc7 = (0.16) Depth: 6/23 00:00:00 31kN 1.Nce2 e5 2.Nf5 Bxf5 3.Rxf5 Rc8 4.Bf7 Re7 = (0.16) Depth: 7/25 00:00:00 104kN 1.Nce2 e5 2.Nf5 Bxf5 3.Rxf5 Rc8 4.Bd5 Qc7 5.Nc3 = (0.25) Depth: 8/25 00:00:00 230kN 1.Nf3! ² (0.28) Depth: 8/25 00:00:01 528kN 1.Nf3! Bc6 2.Nh4 Kg8 3.Ng6 Qc7 4.Nxf8 Kxf8 ² (0.31) Depth: 8/26 00:00:01 663kN 1.Nf3 Qa5 2.Nh4 Qg5 3.Qxg5 hxg5 4.Rxg5 Bc6 5.Ng6+ Kh7 ² (0.28) Depth: 9/27 00:00:03 1616kN 1.Nce2! ² (0.31) Depth: 9/27 00:00:03 1834kN 1.Nce2! e5 2.Nf5 Bxf5 3.Rxf5 Rc8 4.Bf7 Qc7 ² (0.38) Depth: 9/27 00:00:04 2019kN 1.Nce2 e5 2.Nf5 Bxf5 3.Rxf5 Rc8 4.Nc3 Qe7 5.Nd5 Nxd5 ² (0.34) Depth: 10/27 00:00:05 2530kN 1.Nf3! ² (0.38) Depth: 10/28 00:00:07 3379kN 1.Nf3! ² (0.69) Depth: 11/31 00:00:23 12152kN 1.Nf3 Ng8 2.Ne2 Bc6 3.Nfd4 Qg5 4.Qxg5 hxg5 5.Nxc6 bxc6 ± (0.91) Depth: 12/34 00:01:05 35740kN 1.Nf3 Qa5 2.Nh4 Qg5 3.Ng6+ Kh7 4.Qf3 Qa5 5.Qg3 Nh5 ± (0.91) Depth: 13/37 00:02:13 75670kN 1.Nf3 Qa5 2.e5 dxe5 3.Nh4 Bc6 4.Qg3 Nh5 5.Ng6+ Kg8 ± (1.00) Depth: 14/37 00:05:18 183551kN 1.Nf3 Bc6 2.Nh4 g5 3.Ng6+ Kh7 4.Nxf8+ Rxf8 5.Bxe6 Qe7 ± (1.00) Depth: 15/38 00:13:26 473329kN 1.Nf3 Bc6 2.Nh4 g5 3.Ng6+ Kh7 4.Nxf8+ Rxf8 5.Bxe6 Qe7 ± (1.09) Depth: 16/39 00:31:07 1108241kN 1.Nf3 Bc6 2.Nh4 g5 3.Ng6+ Kh7 4.Nxf8+ Rxf8 5.Bxe6 Bd7 ± (1.00) Depth: 17/42 00:56:38 2041451kN 1.Nce2! ± (1.03) Depth: 17/42 01:33:07 3406053kN 1.Nce2! e5 2.Nf5 Bxf5 3.Rxf5 Qe7 4.Nc3 Rac8 5.Rgf1 d5 ± (1.16) Depth: 17/45 01:51:36 4096070kN 1.Nce2 e5 2.Nf5 Bxf5 3.Rxf5 d5 4.Nc3 Qd6 5.Nxd5 Nxd5 ± (1.09) Depth: 18/45 03:08:18 6944239kN 1.Nf3! ± (1.13) Depth: 18/48 04:22:58 9675215kN 1.Nf3 Bc6 2.Nh4 g5 3.Ng6+ Kh7 4.Nxf8+ Rxf8 5.Bxe6 Bd7 ± (1.06) Depth: 19/47 09:28:31 21078954kN 1.Nce2! ± (1.09) Depth: 19/47 11:00:50 24651154kN 1.Nce2! g5 2.h4 g4 3.Nf4 Bg7 4.Ng6+ Kg8 5.e5 dxe5 ± (1.22) Depth: 19/47 15:22:25 34640168kN 1.e5! ± (1.25) Depth: 19/47 18:57:21 42797794kN (Lee, Pensacola,Fl 11.06.2001) With less memory it took between 26-28 hours but screwey enough this may be faster with just 64MB for hash tables don't ask me why. I think if anyone ever plans to renew the nolot positions they should add the position from below as no program has solved this yet now would fritz without 30-90 hours i think! it is from a recent post [D] r1qr2k1/pb2bpp1/1p2pn1p/2p4P/3P1B2/2PB1N2/PP2QPP1/1K1R3R w - - 0 1
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.