Author: Slater Wold
Date: 22:54:57 10/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 05, 2001 at 19:22:03, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On October 04, 2001 at 23:33:42, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>I have the CCC archives, but there is a big hole in them, since the ftp site has >>not been working for some time. Anyway, it sure looks to me like Ke3 is also a >>solution. Can someone refute this move sequence, or show me a perpetual check >>or some other escape? It looks to me like black is simply toast, and rather >>quickly at that! >>Position after Kb3: >>[D] 8/k1b5/P4p2/1Pp2p1p/2P2P1P/1K6/3B4/8 b - - > >I ran this for several hours today: > >1) Shuffling pieces is around is about +3.5 with my program. This lasts through >ply 17, approximately, with the score going up as high as +4. Selected move >varied between Be3 and Kb3. > >2) In ply 18 (90 sec on a dual 1.2 ghz AMD) it found b6+, with a score of +4.5. >This may have been a solution, or at least a good sniff. This lasted until ply >20. > >3) In ply 20 (477 sec), it failed high on Be3 and went up to +6. This has held >through ply 24, with a score of about +7. > >I never saw a high score with Kb3 after the program found b6+. > >I think that Be3 was missed by the original the players and by Reinfeld because >you'd think that Bb6 would hold, but it doesn't. I thought that there might be >some funky way to draw two pawns down, but white can win easily by >triangulation. > >If Bd6 is tried rather than Bb6, you get something similar to what happens after >b6+, after Ka5 Bc7+ b6+ Bxb6+ Kc5. > >Kb3 is at very least not as forcing as the other two. The problem is kind of >wrecked if white can do nothing and still win. I don't think that the +3 or >whatever that programs will show after Kb3 means anything. It's likely that >they aren't seeing a win. > >bruce Well Bruce, with all due respect, you're kinda funny on these things. You seem to have a "threshold" for a winning move. Which I guess makes some sense, but it is very arguable. If Program-A looks at any given position and says, "I am winning by 6+ pawns, and here is my mainline" then it's winning. However if Program-B looks at the same exact position and says, "I am winning by 3+ pawns, and here is my mainline" it would seem by your standard, it's not winning. What if the mainlines are the same? What if Program-A rewards certain things differently than Program-B? It's kind of like you disagreeing that DJ7 solved Nolot #3. It did. It followed Baudot's mainline to a *tee*. And you still don't think it's solved because DJ7 says it's only winning by "x" amount. Which I guess is not above your threshold. It thinks the move is best, it has the mainline just as described by Baudot, how is that not solving the problem? I agree, programs should strive to find the *best* possible move. But a winning move is a winning move, right? It's sort of like drag racing; it doesn't matter if you win by an inch, or by a mile. A win is a win. Slate
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.