Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: R+Ps vs R+Ps

Author: Jim Monaghan

Date: 19:15:32 09/07/01

Go up one level in this thread


Hi Peter,

Here is a difficult R+P endgame for programs illustrating the power of connected
passers vs scattered ones.

[D] 8/5k2/R5pp/3pP2P/p2r1PK1/8/8/8 b - - 0

Karpov - Deep Thought, 1990.

Deep Thought played the greedy 1...gxh5+?? and Karpov quickly showed the power
of connected passed pawns in this type of ending:

1... gxh5+ 2. Kf5! (Not 2. Kxh5? Rxf4) Kg7 3. Ra7+ Kf8 4. e6 Re4 5. Rd7 Rc4 6.
Rxd5 h4 7. Rd3
Ke7 8. Rd7+ Kf8 9. Rh7 h5 10. Ke5 h3 11. f5 Kg8 12. Rxh5 a3 13. Rxh3 a2 14. Ra3
Rc5+ 15. Kf6 (1-0)

Absolutely essential was 1...g5! to break up White's pawns at all costs, viz.

1... g5 2. Rxh6 Rxf4+ (Not 2...gxf4? 3. Kf5!) 3. Kxg5 Rf1 should hold.

(Source: Practical Endgame Play, N. McDonald)

I tried this on a few engines and they seem very confused. I suppose it would
take a very long think on an engine's part to work it all out, if at all.
Rather than solving it thematically (intuiatively?) as a human would. Knowledge
vs Brute Force. It's possible that positions like this would show more of an
engine's shortcomings as opposed to tactical tricks in most endgame studies.

Cheers,
Jim







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.