Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position:

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 18:20:08 10/01/01

Go up one level in this thread

On October 01, 2001 at 15:30:41, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On October 01, 2001 at 15:18:44, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>
>>To be fair, this is because it thought g4 was also a draw.  If Yace thought
>>that, too, there isn't a difference.
>>
>>I'm not trying to apologize for Crafty, but it is dangerous to assume that just
>>because one program chose the fork in the road that did not lead to an army of
>>demons, it means that it could see them.
>>
>>Maybe it saw them, I don't know.
>
>Of course, every good program will shine on some position and not do as well on
>others.
>
>How does Ferret do on this one?  The machine I used was 950 MHz Athlon for
>comparison.

It took 35 seconds on a dual 1.2 ghz machine, with tables (but not KPP vs KP).
The score was 0.00.  Without tables it's been going for a while and hasn't found
it yet.

bruce

• Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position: Peter McKenzie 20:20:06 10/01/01
• Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position: Dann Corbit 18:39:41 10/01/01
  • Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position: Dann Corbit 18:45:44 10/01/01
    • Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position: Dave Gomboc 22:36:28 10/01/01
      • Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position: Uri Blass 22:43:27 10/01/01
        • Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position: Gian-Carlo Pascutto 00:33:42 10/02/01
          • Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position: Bruce Moreland 01:45:20 10/02/01
          • Re: JAFM's interesting pawn endgame test position: Uri Blass 01:14:00 10/02/01

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.