Author: Paul
Date: 08:43:10 11/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 04, 2001 at 10:45:12, leonid wrote: >On November 04, 2001 at 08:59:37, Paul wrote: > >>On November 04, 2001 at 07:54:58, leonid wrote: >> >>>Hello! >> >>Hi ... Pretz's first thoughts on a p3/1000 ... >> >>>This one is easy: >>> >>>[D]Q7/3qq3/2qQqk2/1nQRNqq1/nBKRRNq1/PrbBQq2/1PrPq3/2Bb4 w - - >> >>00:05 WM9 07 Qh8+ Qgg7 Nxd7+ Qcxd7 Nh5+ Qfxh5 Rxe6+ Qgxe6 Qef4+ Qxf4 Rxf4+ Qf5 >>Rxf5+ Kg6 Qg1+ Qg5 Qxg5# >> >>>But if you want to solve something that is not difficult, almost the same but >>>demand more thinking, then try this: >>> >>>[D]Q7/3qq3/2qNqk2/1nNRNqq1/nPKPRNq1/PrbBQq2/1PrQq3/2Bb4 w - - >> >>00:35 WM13 09 Qh8+ Qeg7 Nxd7+ Qexd7 Nh5+ Q5xh5 Rxf5+ Qfxf5 Qeh6+ Qhg6 Q6xg7+ >>Qgxg7 Qdh6+ Qfg6 Rf4+ Qxf4 Qxg6+ Ke7 Qgxg7+ Qf7+ Qxf7+ Kxd6 Qf4+ Ke7 Qhf8# >> >>Not sure of course whether these are the shortest possible mates ... >> >>>Please indicate your result. > >Hi, Paul! > >Now you reached me for sure. On first and second position, your time is better >that mine. First took 9 second for selective search 9 moves deep, and second 62 >sec for selective in 13 moves. Both solutions are the shortest possible. I >solved both by brute force. Branching factor is very mild for both of them. > >Cheers, >Leonid. This is just a coincidence, my friend ... you happened to pick positions that are a bit harder for your program. Remember, you are in control! ;) It's kind of funny because I used my old & trusty "Leonid settings" and didn't try my new ones that are still not reliable enough. The second position is quite a bit faster with the new settings: 22 seconds. Haha! See ya, Paul
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.