Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:20:25 10/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 01, 2001 at 19:02:53, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On October 01, 2001 at 15:14:07, Slater Wold wrote: > >Yes and we can also assume already that more than 2 queens for one >side is also complete nonsense, though it is legal. No it is not nonsense There are games when one side gets 3 queens because the other side does not want to resign on time. The problem is also a theoretic problem. > >Also it's unlikely that you will have like 8 pawns on 6th rank, yes >even on 5th or 4th rank having 8 pawns there from one side is nonsense. > >Loads of things are nonsense. > >Like having a king on the other side of the board with both sides >having all pieces still left, that's also nonsense. > >Loads of those limitations make it go like 10^40 easily at most. I guess that if you are talking about practical positions you may get only something like 10^25. > >I can remember in ICCA some mathematician came down to 10^43. This is a logical guess for the number of legal positions without limitation except the limitation that say that there is a legal chess game that leads to the position. 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.