Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:24:18 05/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 18, 1998 at 00:56:36, Pascal Coupet wrote:
>On May 17, 1998 at 13:34:42, Moritz Berger wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Here's the position in EPD format:
>>
>>r1bq1rk1/8/6p1/1PN2n2/p2pB2p/3Nb3/P5PP/1R1Q1R1K w - -
>>
>>Solution times so far (ranking according to times to play a different
>>move than Bxa8, details below, all times on a P233MMX, 128MB RAM):
>>
>>Program / Ne5 / b6 / g4
>>-----------------------------------
>>1. MCP 7.1 / - / 12:27 / 03:29
>>2. Fritz 5 / - / 05:39 / 24:54
>>3. Hiarcs 6 / - / 10:57 / 15:44
>>4. Shredder 2 / 21:47 / 01:09:48 / 01:53:44
>>5. Rebel 9 / 35:54 / 51:44 / not tested
>>6. CSTal Paris / - / 01:20:46 / 02:08:42
>>
>>
>
>Results on a PII 333.
>
>Nimzo98 32M Hash: (around 260000 n/s)
> Select Fxa8 first then fail hight on g4 at 00:23 (depth 9) and give
>the PV with an evaluation of 3.94 at 2:24
>
>Virtual Chess II 16M Hash: (around 175000 n/s)
> 00:07 Fxa8(4.32) depth 8
> 01:29 Fxa8(1.32) depth 9
> 07:12 b6(fail hight) depth 9
> 12:01 b6(2.34) depth 9
> 17:05 g4(fail hight) depth 9
> 19:32 g4(2.86) depth 9
>
>Pascal
Earlier this morning, Chris pointed out two things: (1) that I had
made a mistake in the analysis I posted yesterday. This turned out to
be true, in that I have an automated script that runs these tests, but
the script assumes "PGN" input. In the game posted by Dirk, whatever
program he used seriously violated the PGN standard by using 0-0 for
castling (zero-zero) rather than the mandatory O-O (oh-oh). The script
I used assumed real pgn, and basically used the wrong input command in
Crafty (read) which silently ignores any errors (or comments) so that
the { stuff } doesn't cause a lot of errors. But it did corrupt the
game so that Bxa8 was not legal. The second thing he pointed out is
that
he's *still* incapable of carrying on a reasonable conversation, when it
won't further his own personal agenda. There were better ways to point
out a simple error than to make insulting remarks about the
"qualifications"
of folks over on CCC... but that's typical.
Here is the correct output, after confirming that the game was read in
from the following correct PGN input:
[Event "Private Match"]
[Site "unknown"]
[Date "1998.05.18"]
[Round "1"]
[White "unknown"]
[WhiteElo ""]
[Black "unknown"]
[BlackElo ""]
[Result "*"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5
7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 c5 10. dxc6 bxc6 11. b4 d5 12. Bg5
d4 13. Bxf6 Bxf6 14. Na4 Bg7 15. Nc5 h5 16. f4 exf4 17. Ned3
h4 18. Rxf4 a5 19. b5 cxb5 20. cxb5 a4 21. Rb1 Bh6 22. Rf1 Be3+
23. Kh1 f5 24. Bf3 fxe4 25. Bxe4 Nf5
clearing hash tables
time surplus 0.00 time limit 16:39 (16:39)
depth time score variation (1)
starting thread 1
starting thread 2
starting thread 3
1 0.01 6.35 26. Bxa8
1-> 0.01 6.35 26. Bxa8
2 0.04 6.17 26. Bxa8 a3
2-> 0.04 6.17 26. Bxa8 a3
3 0.05 ++ 26. Bxa8!!
3 0.05 6.76 26. Bxa8 Qg5 27. Qxa4
3-> 0.05 6.76 26. Bxa8 Qg5 27. Qxa4
4 0.06 6.56 26. Bxa8 Kh8 27. Nxa4 Qg5
4-> 0.07 6.56 26. Bxa8 Kh8 27. Nxa4 Qg5
5 0.13 6.61 26. Bxa8 a3 27. Qb3+ Kh8 28. Qxa3
Qg5
5-> 0.15 6.61 26. Bxa8 a3 27. Qb3+ Kh8 28. Qxa3
Qg5
6 0.25 6.88 26. Bxa8 Kh8 27. Qxa4 Qg5 28. Bd5
Qg4
6-> 0.29 6.88 26. Bxa8 Kh8 27. Qxa4 Qg5 28. Bd5
Qg4
7 1.24 7.01 26. Bxa8 h3 27. Qxa4 Qh4 28. Bd5+
Kh8
29. gxh3 Qxh3 30. Qd1
7-> 1.33 7.01 26. Bxa8 h3 27. Qxa4 Qh4 28. Bd5+
Kh8
29. gxh3 Qxh3 30. Qd1
8 2.74 -- 26. Bxa8
8 3.81 5.89 26. Bxa8 Ng3+ 27. hxg3 hxg3 28.
Rxf8+
Qxf8 29. Bd5+ Kh8 30. Bf3 Qh6+ 31.
Bh5 gxh5 32. Nxa4
8-> 5.86 5.89 26. Bxa8 Ng3+ 27. hxg3 hxg3 28.
Rxf8+
Qxf8 29. Bd5+ Kh8 30. Bf3 Qh6+ 31.
Bh5 gxh5 32. Nxa4
9 6.20 -- 26. Bxa8
9 7.29 5.57 26. Bxa8 Ng3+ 27. hxg3 hxg3 28.
Rxf8+
Qxf8 29. Bd5+ Kh8 30. Bf3 Qh6+ 31.
Bh5 Qg5 32. Bg4 Bxg4 33. Qxa4
9-> 10.75 5.57 26. Bxa8 Ng3+ 27. hxg3 hxg3 28.
Rxf8+
Qxf8 29. Bd5+ Kh8 30. Bf3 Qh6+ 31.
Bh5 Qg5 32. Bg4 Bxg4 33. Qxa4
10 23.05 5.54 26. Bxa8 Ng3+ 27. hxg3 hxg3 28.
Rxf8+
Qxf8 29. Bd5+ Kh8 30. Bf3 Qd8 31.
Nf4
Qh4+ 32. Nh3 Bxh3 <HT>
10-> 32.09 5.54 26. Bxa8 Ng3+ 27. hxg3 hxg3 28.
Rxf8+
Qxf8 29. Bd5+ Kh8 30. Bf3 Qd8 31.
Nf4
Qh4+ 32. Nh3 Bxh3 <HT>
11 36.55 -- 26. Bxa8
11 53.51 0.56 26. Bxa8 Ng3+ 27. hxg3 hxg3 28. Bd5+
Kh7 29. Nf4 Bxf4 30. Rf3 Qxd5 31.
Rc3
Qh5+ 32. Qxh5+ gxh5 33. Rd3 Bf5
11 1:25 ++ 26. b6!!
11 2:15 3.16 26. b6 Rb8 27. b7 Ng3+ 28. hxg3
Rxf1+
29. Qxf1 hxg3 30. Nf4 Be6 31. Ncxe6
Qh4+ 32. Nh3 Qxe4 33. Qf7+ Kxf7 34.
Neg5+ Ke7 35. Nxe4
Bottom line here is that Crafty noticed that Ba8 looks bad at 36
seconds,
and at 1:25 changes to the more logical b6... I didn't let it run any
further to see if g4 pops up, although I will later when the machine is
not busy on ICC.
Point 2: which sort of explains why Chris is "so well loved"
everywhere,
is that there are two ways to point out a mistake. One, the simple "it
looks like you are searching the wrong position." The second, which is
"his" way, is to use such a mistake to castigate an entire group of
folks (CCC) to further his own agenda. We catch mistakes all the time,
both on CCC and here. But *most* of us point them out without
specifically
attempting to be insulting. That's the beauty of CCC, that such posts
simply "don't make it there." And it shows the shortcoming of an
unmoderated
forum... personal insults pop up everywhere.
In any case, my apologies for posting analysis that was wrong. I
usually
try to check the input to weed out the two errors that cause me the most
grief, incorrect castling and using a lowercase "b" for bishop moves.
The
font on my current xwindows doesn't make 0 and O very different, so that
I
simply overlooked it...
Now if Chris wants to apologize for stupid remarks... never mind...
we'll
see if that ever happens.
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.