Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:31:18 09/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2001 at 04:53:23, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On September 09, 2001 at 20:17:19, Uri Blass wrote: > >>My assumption that it is impossible and I hope that you agree that if the number >>of plies is big enough it is also impossible. > >Not at all! > >The whole idea of SE is if you are in a forced sequence that you >see the ending of it NO MATTER HOW DEEP IT IS. > >You can over SIXTY ply deeper with SE. Easily. No If you extend a full ply for every singular move by 0.25 pawn you will never finish your search. I know Robert >even lost a championship gamesdue to this because he did not >expect the program to go so deep and forgot to allocate memory >to store those extra moves. > >>No >>Having a +2 score is not a proof that it saw the win. >>It may be also a bug in the evaluation. > >I find it more likely they saw the win rather than >having a bug in the evaluation. They did win the game >after all. > >>I start with the fact that most of the game moves before Bg5 does not seem to be >>forced so the depth after Bg5 should be very small. > >*c5* Be4 *Ra6* Rb1 *f5* *Bc2* Rb7 *Bd8* *g6* > >The * moves are singular. I only see THREE that are not in >this sequence, and in all cases Hiarcs disagreed with the move >choices so they may very well not be considered singular by >Hiarcs because it does not see that they are singularly better >but DT obviously did. I do not believe that they are singular Ra6 is only slightly better than Rb8 g6 is only slightly better than Nf7 Note that 29.Rb1 is probably a positional error based on Deep Fritz's opinion and black gets more than 0.5 pawn advantage after that move. The point of starting with Bg5 was to convince people that deep thought could not see +2 advantage but it seems that you believe that deep thought was god and no number of moves is going to convince you that deep thought could not see it. In that case it seems that the best way to convince you should be to start from the game from the first move after c5. I was not convinced that white is losing after 32.Bg5 but I feel more sure that I can draw a correspondence game against you and your programs from the root position and not from the position after 32.Bg5. I do not like to spend a lot of computer time on this correspondence game without seeing a clear evidence that white is losing so I prefer to see first that you can beat Deep Fritz or even Crafty from the initial position and only after you do it and post your game I may try to improve the line. Uri
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.