Author: leonid
Date: 12:18:52 10/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 23, 2001 at 14:23:55, Paul wrote: >On October 23, 2001 at 12:21:10, leonid wrote: > >>On October 23, 2001 at 11:03:15, Paul wrote: >> >>>On October 23, 2001 at 09:49:55, leonid wrote: >>> >>>>[D]NRqQQqRQ/kqrqnrbn/Nq4qQ/1Qn2qQ1/2QrbQ2/3BB3/8/K6Q w - - >>>> >>>>Please indicate your result. >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>>Leonid. >>> >>>Hi, >> >>Hi! >> >>>Pretz (she's a TSCP-clone and proud of it ;)) says this is an easy mate in 10: >> >>What is exactly "TSCP"? You want, probably, say that you looked into some >>program by doing your own, but if it is so, what exactly? > >Sorry Leonid, that remark was for Heiner, see his message from earlier today: > >http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?193869 > >TSCP is "Tom Kerrigan's Simple Chess Program". It has a basic board structure, >move generation and alpha-beta search, a (very) small evaluation function and is Actually, at the beginning, I expected that you speak about Tom's program but was not able to find his name inside of "TSCP". This is why I asked what it was. Now it is clear. >very clearly written and easy to understand (if you can read C). I feel me very lazy to read what other people wrote. It could be that reading other people ideas is even not that important as somebody could think it should be. The most valuable, for everyone in writing its code, is to have free time and needed computer. For now, I do not write but it could be otherwise in the future. Only yesterday I read few articles (Smart Computer, October 2001) that describe some attractive 64 bits chips from AMD and Intel. Those 64 bits computers must become accessible in only few years from now. Not only for those that stays in big institutions, or had respectable bank acount but for many other ordinary folk. Then funny moment will come into this World to enjoy warm sunshine! >In short, IMHO it is *the* program to read if you want to start programming one >yourself. I used the first version of it to start my Pretz project. > >I wish Heiner's "Chessmaster clone" remark was true, because that would mean I'd >know the insides of Chessmaster, boy .. that would be something! I think it's a >really really (ok ... one more :) really great program! Paul, but do you have some recent version of Chessmater that do brute force? Could you say me its time for last position for 4 and 5 moves? >Except for the fact that my CM6000 doesn't seem to work correctly on Windows XP. Surprises are all the time there. I do remember that I never was able to make my old Genius 2 work in correct way after certain time. It search mate by brute force. I remember that it was not a liar and his time was good. >Installed it just now and tried your last position, the first try took 6 >minutes, I thought: wot? that can't be right? ... and on the further tries it >just froze. :( Must be doing something wrong, but what? > >>Mate is really easy but still you almost reached me on this one. Mine took 3.8 >>sec (can be said 4 sec) to find mate by selective in 10 moves deep. > >But I used a p3/1000 and a hashtable for this, sooo ... :) I doubt that hash is very effective in selective but, still, I must verify it later. >>It is mate in 10. Verified only 9 moves by brute force, where branching factor >>was mild. > >I checked my solution with Chest later, it's a mate in 10 alright ... I'll leave >the details to Herr Marxen. > >>>00:04 WM10 07 Rxb7+ Qbxb7 Qcxc5+ Qxc5 Qgxc5+ Kxa8 Nxc7+ Qdxc7 Qa5+ Qga6 Qaxa6+ >>>Qa7 Qaxa7+ Qxa7+ Qxa7+ Kxa7 Qhb6+ Ka8 Qa6# Cheers, Leonid.
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.