Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: A Reply to Dann Corbit on the Nxg6 Combination

Author: ALI MIRAFZALI

Date: 07:54:29 12/03/01


First I like to say that Phalanx is much waeker than CM8000.Secondly I said
chess as pratically solved ;which is a far cry from from it being actually
solved.Thirdly the analysis by Phalanx proves nothing.At the slowest time
control which is 40/2 the program has only an average of 3 minutes to see
that Nxg6 actually wins .It should have at least a plus 1 pawn evaluation
or more after 3 min.Also the full analysis of why Nxg6 is winning is
19 plys deep.Even DeepBlue could not not reach 19 plys in 3 minutes.
Fourthly you claim if Phalanx did reach a certain point if would play e6
and not exd6 but you offer no proof.The point here is that programs DONOT
understand the Position after 19.Nxg6.And hence do not see the winng lines all
the way to the end .And this DOES MATTER.



This page took 0.01 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.