Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 14:21:45 09/14/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 14, 2001 at 16:25:00, Rafael Andrist wrote: >On September 14, 2001 at 14:33:42, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On September 14, 2001 at 14:29:41, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On September 14, 2001 at 13:26:29, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On September 14, 2001 at 07:20:05, Steffen Jakob wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi, >>>>> >>>>>I read lots of messages about cooked WAC positions. I think the version which I >>>>>have is rather outdated. Where can I find an EPD version of WAC which contains >>>>>all known cooks? >>>> >>>>This one should be pretty up to date: >>>>ftp://cap.connx.com/pub/EPD/wacnew.epd >>> >>>I believe that if you try to find cooks you can find many cooks if you define a >>>cook as another winning move. >>> >>>Here are examples from the EPD >>> >>>[D]r4q1k/p2bR1rp/2p2Q1N/5p2/5p2/2P5/PP3PPP/R5K1 w - - bm Rf7; id "WAC.008 >>> >>>Rf7 is the fastest way to win but Nf7+ is probably also winning. >>> >>>Another example(more convincing) >>>[D]r2rb1k1/pp1q1p1p/2n1p1p1/2bp4/5P2/PP1BPR1Q/1BPN2PP/R5K1 w - - bm Qxh7+; id >>>"WAC.014"; >>> >>>Qxh7+ is mate in 4 but Ne4 is another way to win the game inspite of the fact >>>that there is no forced mate in the near future. >> >>Those look pretty strange to me, but any move that leads to a certain win must >>be considered a "best move." > >I think those moves should be considered as "good moves", but only one move is >the "best move" (except if there are different pathes with the same mate >distance). I disagree completely. If the game theoretic value of both moves are identical, then the value of both moves is identical. A move that wins in 2 is not better than a move that wins in 45. Both moves win. The 2 move win might be prettier, but it isn't any better.
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.