Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 15:51:58 08/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2001 at 15:40:45, Joshua Lee wrote: >I was wondering about this nolot test position because Nf6 has been found by >three different programs DT-2 Fritz 6 and Goliath Light 1.5 it's really Ng5 :) Ng5 is mating black in the long run, but it's pretty hard to see and as sidelines are so complex i never could calculate which are the cruciallines a program must see before it gets a fail high to ng5. >Nolot #9 - Ng5 >r4r1k/4bppb/2n1p2p/p1n1P3/1p1p1BNP/3P1NP1/qP2QPB1/2RR2K1 w - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Goliath Light 1.5: > >1.Ne1 Rac8 2.h5 > µ (-1.38) Depth: 6/14 00:00:00 >1.Ne1 Rfc8 2.Bxc6 Rxc6 3.Qf3 > -+ (-1.50) Depth: 6/18 00:00:00 16kN >1.h5 Rac8 2.Nh4 Qb3 > -+ (-1.49) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 31kN >1.h5 Rac8 2.Nh4 Qb3 > -+ (-1.49) Depth: 7/19 00:00:00 38kN >1.h5 Rac8 2.Ne1 Bf5 3.Bf3 > -+ (-1.69) Depth: 7/22 00:00:00 60kN >1.Ne1 > -+ (-1.49) Depth: 7/22 00:00:00 61kN >1.Ne1 Rfc8 2.Ra1 Qb3 3.Rdc1 > µ (-1.26) Depth: 7/22 00:00:00 68kN >1.Ne1 Rfc8 2.Ra1 Qb3 3.Rdc1 > µ (-1.26) Depth: 8/22 00:00:00 89kN >1.Ne1 Qa4 2.Rc4 h5 3.Nh2 Bg6 > µ (-1.33) Depth: 8/22 00:00:01 169kN >1.Ne1 Qa4 2.Rc4 h5 3.Nh2 Bg6 > µ (-1.33) Depth: 9/26 00:00:01 320kN >1.Ne1 Qa4 2.Rc4 Rac8 3.Rdc1 h5 4.Bg5 Bxg5 5.hxg5 > µ (-1.24) Depth: 9/26 00:00:02 450kN >1.Nf6 Rac8 2.Nxh7 Kxh7 3.Rc4 Rfd8 4.Rdc1 Rd5 > µ (-1.20) Depth: 9/27 00:00:05 1274kN >1.Nf6 Rac8 2.Nxh7 Kxh7 3.Rc4 Rfd8 4.Rdc1 Rd5 > µ (-1.20) Depth: 10/27 00:00:05 1294kN >1.Nf6 Bf5 2.Ra1 Qb3 3.Nd2 Qxb2 4.Bxc6 gxf6 5.Bxa8 Rxa8 > µ (-1.18) Depth: 10/28 00:00:06 1714kN >1.Ne1 > µ (-1.07) Depth: 10/28 00:00:06 1921kN >1.Ne1 Rac8 2.Ra1 Qb3 3.Bxc6 Rxc6 4.Rxa5 h5 5.Nh2 Bg6 > µ (-0.88) Depth: 10/28 00:00:08 2504kN >1.Rxc5 > µ (-0.77) Depth: 10/30 00:00:10 3115kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 h5 3.Rxc5 hxg4 4.Ng5 Qb1+ 5.Rc1 Bxd3 6.Rxb1 Bxe2 7.Bxc6 > ³ (-0.36) Depth: 10/30 00:00:11 3634kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 h5 3.Rxc5 hxg4 4.Ng5 Qb1+ 5.Rc1 Bxd3 6.Rxb1 Bxe2 7.Bxc6 > ³ (-0.36) Depth: 11/30 00:00:12 3934kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 Ba7 3.Rxc6 Bf5 4.Ngh2 Qb1+ 5.Bf1 Rfc8 6.Rc4 > ³ (-0.37) Depth: 11/30 00:00:15 5130kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 Ba7 3.Rxc6 Bf5 4.Ngh2 Qb1+ 5.Bf1 Rfc8 6.Rc4 > ³ (-0.37) Depth: 12/31 00:00:18 6613kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 Ba7 3.Rxc6 Bf5 4.Ngh2 Qb1+ 5.Ne1 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 Qxe1+ 7.Qf1 Qxf1+ >8.Nxf1 > ³ (-0.39) Depth: 12/31 00:00:23 9235kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 Ba7 3.Rxc6 Bf5 4.Ngh2 Qb1+ 5.Ne1 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 Qxe1+ 7.Qf1 Qxf1+ >8.Nxf1 > ³ (-0.39) Depth: 13/38 00:00:39 17395kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 a4 3.Rxc5 a3 4.Qf1 Qxb2 5.Bc1 Qb1 6.Nd2 Qxd3 7.Qxd3 Bxd3 >8.Bxc6 > = (-0.17) Depth: 13/38 00:01:16 33422kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 a4 3.Rxc5 a3 4.Qf1 Qxb2 5.Bc1 Qb1 6.Nd2 Qxd3 7.Qxd3 Bxd3 >8.Bxc6 > = (-0.17) Depth: 14/43 00:02:12 65575kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 a4 3.Rxc5 a3 4.Qf1 Qxb2 5.Bc1 Qb1 6.Nd2 Qxd3 7.Qxd3 Bxd3 >8.Bxc6 > ³ (-0.47) Depth: 14/43 00:02:45 80416kN >1.Rxc5 Bxc5 2.Rc1 a4 3.Rxc5 a3 4.Bc1 Rac8 > ³ (-0.60) Depth: 14/43 00:04:03 117075kN >1.Nf6 > ³ (-0.49) Depth: 14/43 00:09:26 295763kN >1.Nf6 Bf5 2.g4 Bxd3 3.Rxd3 Nxd3 4.Qxd3 gxf6 5.Rxc6 Qxb2 6.Bxh6 fxe5 7.Bxf8 > ³ (-0.38) Depth: 14/44 00:13:32 404418kN > >(Lee, Pensacola, FL 29.08.2001) > >I wouldn't say Commercials are better than Deep Thought or Blue but when Goliath >finds the move quicker it sure adds fuel to the fire. > >Exeter Chess Club: Trawled from the 'Net >From >cen.ex.ac.uk!strath-cs!uknet!warwick!slxsys!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!hawnews.watson.ibm.com!sawmill!fhh >Fri Aug 5 09:37:26 BST 1994 >Article: 31130 of rec.games.chess >Newsgroups: rec.games.chess >Path: >cen.ex.ac.uk!strath-cs!uknet!warwick!slxsys!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!hawnews.watson.ibm.com!sawmill!fhh >From: fhh@watson.ibm.com (Feng-Hsiung Hsu) >Subject: Nolot's 11 difficult positions (possible spoilers) >Message-ID: >Sender: fhh@watson.ibm.com >Date: Thu, 28 Jul 1994 18:19:37 GMT >Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of >IBM. >Nntp-Posting-Host: sawmill.watson.ibm.com >Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center >Followup-To: rec.games.chess >Lines: 251 > >Sometime ago, the following 11 positions collected by Pierre Nolot were >posted to rgc. Pierre claimed that no computers can solve any of them >in reasonable time (and no micros in even a few weeks). A long while back, he >might be right. At this point, a few of them are solvable even under >tournament time control. The ones that we tried overnight are all solvable >in a few hours. DT-2 was searching around 3 million nodes/sec during the >runs. The time probably would be reduced by 5-30 times for the harder >problems if the machine has a better quiescence search. >9 ;r4;r1;k/4;b;p;p;b/2;n1;p2;p/;p1;n1p3/1;p1;p1bnp/3p1np1/;qp2qpb1/2rr2k1/40 > >White to move > >8 R * - * - R - K >7 * - * - B P P B >6 - * N * P * - P >5 P - N - p - * - >4 - P - P - b n p >3 * - * p * n p - >2 Q p - * q p b * >1 * - r r * - k - > > a b c d e f g h > >Source: unknown. > >After 9 minutes, it played 1. Nf6, expecting 1. ... Rfc8 2. Nh7 Kh7 3. Ra1 ... >The score was slightly nagative for white. On longer searches, it went up >to half a pawn and creeping up.
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.