Author: Gogi Cviak
Date: 16:13:27 12/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
NO, it;s not a bad idea, we may all hate somebody or some killer, but we have to admit they are good if they cant be cought or whatever, I mean u may hate this "Stupid" rule, but admit it, it has it merits... On December 29, 2001 at 06:34:45, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote: >On December 29, 2001 at 03:03:30, Gogi Cviak wrote: > >>>KNNN vs KR can't possibly be a win for the knights, since RxN is drawn, and >>>there are three of them to threaten. In KBN vs KRR, "all" you have to do to win >>>is win an exchange with a knight while preserving your bishop, but in this one >>>you have to win a whole rook while preserving everything. >>-Interesting Questions >> >>-Bruce >> >>so KBN VS KRR, can they win? > >The two rooks can win in some positions, sure. But there must be lots of draws >too. > >>When will all this 6 pieces be finished and I dont >>mean those with the pawns, but I would suggest to Eugene to make the most >>important endings, like: RPPKRK, IS THIS REALLY A DRAW? > >If the pawns are not doubled and neither of them is doomed to immediate capture, >I expect most of these positions to be won, with some draws. > >>Will be ever see perfect >>moves for this? >> >>SO KNNN is a draw, > >I am not sure what you mean, KNNN vs K is generally won (and it is not >difficult), KNNN vs KR is quite difficult and perhaps mostly drawn, but Dann's >analysis in some other post are very simplistic, so do not believe them without >criticism. > >>but KNNB VS rook is also a draw? > >This must be generally won for the three pieces. > >>KRNN VS KR I ALSO THINK IS A DRAW > >No way, this is won (with a few exceptional positions). > >>what about >>KRBN VS KR, > >This is also won. > >>i think we have a win there in over 200 moves? same with KRBB? > >Also won. >I think you are mistaking these endings with KRB vs KNN and KRN vs KNN, which >are generally won and where the longest wins have been found (so far as I know). > >> >>Hey if this happens I guess it should be played in real matches, sorry, a win is >>a win, sure there can be a break, but play must continue... >> > >I am not sure what you mean. Do you propose a change to the 50-moves rule? (I >may not be able to reply later, so I say now that I am against any change to the >50-moves rule). > >>NOW, KNN V K, IS A DRAW, but dont u think that is A HUGE INJUSTICE IN CHESS, I >>MEAN THAT'S 6.25 POINTS, DONT U THINK IN THAT CASE THERE SHOULD BE A NEW RULE, >>LIKE ADDING A PAWN OR A BISHOP? >> > >I do not think there is anything unfair and I think your new rule proposal is a >very bad idea. > >>So, tell me KNNN VS KB, IS THIS A WIN? how many moves? > >I think it is mostly won, and not very long. > >> >>Ken Thompson's endings, I know they are different format from Nalimov's but I am >>wondering, they both used different methods in finding the perfect moves? > >Thompson uses distance-to-conversion, while Nalimov uses distance-to-mate. I >think the index-schema is also quite different. So far as I know, neither of >them is theoretically perfect (in the sense of giving the theoratical game >result of a position with perfect play following the rules of chess). >José.
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.