Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:29:42 09/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2001 at 16:38:50, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 06, 2001 at 16:08:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 06, 2001 at 15:14:43, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>> >>>I did not say that programs can see the repetition but that they can >>>see Kh1 for good reasons. >>> >> >>There we will just have to disagree. The only "good reason" to play Kh1 >>is something _concrete_. IE "I played that because I saw that if I played >>Kf1 I would walk into a perpetual." Or "I played Kh1 because I saw that if >>I played Kf1 I would lose a pawn." Or something reasonable. Just choosing >>Kh1 makes little sense. The king should centralize unless there is some >>compelling reason why it should not. And Kh1 is not centralizing anything >>at all. H1 is one of the worst 4 squares on the board for a king to >>occupy, _unless_ there is a compelling reason for it to sit there. >> >>If DF can't see a compelling reason, it is just choosing it for random >>(and wrong) reasons... >> >>I have had my program choose the right move for the wrong reason, on many >>occasions. I try to fix those as I consider them "bugs" and not "good >>luck things." >> >> >> >>> >>>The reason that Kh1 does not give black the chance of Qe3 >>>is good enough. >>> >>>Humans are also going to choose Kh1 even without seeing the >>>draw by Qe3 if they understand that after Kf1 Qe3 black has chances >>>when after Kh1 black has no chances and has to go to a losing endgame. >>> >> >>Kh1 or Kf1 doesn't actually prevent Qe3. > >Kh1 prevents Qe3 with similiar results and I am not talking about >perpetual check. >After 44.Kf1 Rb8 45.Ra6 Qe3 black can get few pawns for the piece >before the perpetual check. > >After 44.Kh1 Rb8 45.Ra6 Qe3 is simply a losing move > >I also see that I remembered wrong and Deep Fritz does not see >45...Qe3 in the main line when it analyzes move 44 of white >and it simply avoids 45.Ra6 in the main line before changing it's mind >because it believes that 45.Qd7+ is better. > >When I give it to analyze move 45 it can see Qe3 in the main line >before changing it's mind to 45.Qd7+ that is probably also drawing. > > It just means that if the king is >>on f1, there is a possible perpetual, while if the king is on h1 there is not. >>But the queen can go there either way. Which is why I discount any program >>playing either move unless they see _the_ reason for the move. > >programs cannot see everything by search. >I did not talk about the static evaluation of the position after Qe3 >but about the static evaluation of the position some moves after Qe3 >that is the reason for avoiding Kf1. >> >> >> >> >> >>>It is about king safety's evaluation >>>The micros can see that the white king is not safe after Kf1 >>>and black has chances by Qe3 when deeper blue could not see it. >> >>I don't believe that for a minute, otherwise DF would not keep getting >>tricked by king safety issues against Nemeth. If it could understand that >>Kf1 is worse than Kh1 based on evaluation, Nemeth would not keep mating the >>program with straightforward attacks. >> >> >>> >>>It is possible that deeper blue saw that both kings are not safe and >>>simply added king safety scores. >> >> >>That is possible. Or it saw that both _are_ safe since no program can >>see the resulting perpetual after Kf1. And given that both appear to be >>equally safe if you can't see the draw, then Kf1 is more logical. >> >> >> >>> >>>If it did it then it is clearly wrong to do it because if both kings >>>are not safe you cannot be sure about the result and the evaluation >>>should be closer to a draw. >>> >>>Uri >> >>That sounds like Gandalf. It doesn't work. > >I do not understand what gandalf has to do with it. > >Uri Gandalf is too optimistic about draws. It often produces scores of 0.00, then the score drops drastically after it makes a supposedly drawing move. It seems to assume that if it can't find a way out of a series of checks, then it is going to be a repetition. It is more often wrong than right.
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.