Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:52:51 09/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 23, 2001 at 13:00:26, Peter Berger wrote: >On September 23, 2001 at 11:28:19, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On September 23, 2001 at 08:54:02, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>On September 23, 2001 at 05:29:51, Peter Berger wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>2b3k1/p4ppp/7q/2Q5/8/P3r1P1/1r4BP/R3R1K1 b - - bm Bb7; id "ECM.1197"; >>>> >>>>This one looks wrong. >>> >>>Nope...Bb7 is the fastest mate. >> >>I see that both (Rxg2 and Bb7) ends up in checkmate or huge advantage. I do not >>think it is a good idea to have this kind of test. Once a program finds a mate >>it might stick to it. That does not change at all the strength of a program. In >>other words, this position does not test any improvement in stregth IMHO. >>I would take it out. > >Bringer confirms the faster mate with more time - I think this position is a >little pointless but both decisions make sense: > >0:00:21.4 (11/34) 6371918 18.32 1...Rxg2+ (Mat=-440,50=0) >0:01:32.8 (11/40) 26569158 Matt in 10 1...Rxg2+ (Mat=-440,50=0) >0:06:19.9 (11/40) 103276783 Matt in 9 1...Bb7 (Mat=-100,50=1) For comparison Chessmaster6000 ss=10 (pIII850) see 1...Bb7 as mate in 9 after 1 second on PIII850 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.