Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:06:46 05/13/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 13, 1998 at 06:54:04, Roland Pfister wrote: > >On May 13, 1998 at 06:28:11, Howard Exner wrote: > >>On May 12, 1998 at 15:56:29, blass uri wrote: >> >> >>>39...Nh5 does not win >>>40.Qf2 Qe5+ >>>41.g3 Nxg3 >>>42.Rd5 Nf1+ >>>43.Kg1 Qe6 >>>44.d7 Qg6+ >>>45.Kh1 Ng3+ >>>46.Kh2 and black has to do draw by Nf1+ (Ithink the computer >>>did not see that Rh1+ 47.Kg2 Ne4+ 48.Kxh1 Nxf2+ Kh2 >>>win for white) >>>Fritz5 also does not see in reasonable time Nh5 does not win >> >>This draw discovery I think makes this position even a better >>one for testing. Perhaps the best move is now Re3 instead of >>Nh5. It would be interesting to see how many programs play Nh5 >>and when they again decide to reject the move. Is this a classic example >>of the horizon effect? > >I had Patzer run all night (11 hours) on a UltraSparc 167MHz to see >when it will find Nh5. From depth 6 to 14 (when time was over) it >showed Re3 with a draw evaluation (-0.09). > >After reading Uri's post I entered Nh5 and it showed also a draw. >It follows exactly his moves. So why do other programs think that >Nh5 wins? I ran it for a reasonably long time and also stuck with Re3...
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.