Author: Slater Wold
Date: 18:26:54 10/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2001 at 20:09:51, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 09, 2001 at 19:52:47, Slater Wold wrote: > >>>None of these searches found a mate in ten. So far, chest is the only tool that >>>found it (IIRC). >> >> >>In how long?? > >Chest used 15961 seconds on p200 to find the mate in 10 and it should be >translated to less than 1 hour on fast hardware. That's _very_ respectable. > >Unfortunately there are programs that have no chance to find it in an hour >because they stop to search when they find a mate. Yes. I cannot use ANY Chessbase engine, they stop when they find the first mate. > >The smartest program in finding mates based on my experience is chessmaster >but I am not sure if it can find the mate in less than an hour because I believe >that this is not the kind of the mate that it likes(it likes more mates when >there are more pieces in the board). I agree. But I don't have ChessMaster installed. > >I did not test chessmaster so I may be wrong. I think it could find mate. In how long might be another story. > >I also do not have all the 5 piece tablebases and I expected that maybe they can >help in finding the mate in 10 because programs do not have to search after the >last capture that leads to 5 piece tablebase position. You would think. But it looks like TB's *might* be hindering the discovery of a quicker mate. > >Note that some tablebases like KQRP vs K may be also productive in finding the >mate faster(in the main line of chest it gets KQRP vs K position in a position >when black does mate in 3). I have all 3/4/5 and a LOT of 6's. > >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.