Author: Albert Silver
Date: 15:43:01 01/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2002 at 18:11:45, Sune Fischer wrote:
>On January 26, 2002 at 17:48:00, Roy Eassa wrote:
>
>>On January 25, 2002 at 19:47:44, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>On January 25, 2002 at 19:33:24, Albert Silver wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>Ok, here's a question that would be interesting to answer: Take all the
>>>>tablebases and see what the numbers (quantity and percentile stats) of
>>>>non-losing moves in positions where a non-losing move exists. And if possible, a
>>>>breakdown of those numbers to compare between numbers of pieces on the board.
>>>>Just to see whether a tendency in changes of stats according to the number of
>>>>pieces (3-4-5-6) is detectable.
>>>
>>>A more interesting question is to see with 6 men on the board in a position that
>>>is somewhat complicated and can be won/lost/drawn -- what percentage of moves by
>>>super GM's are not mistakes. I am guessing about 80-90%. It would be nice to
>>>have a study to find out.
>>>
>>>I suspect with 4 or 5, it's a lot higher, but you have to get that far first.
>>
>>
>>
>>Not just GMs. GMs rated 2800 (a MUCH smaller set). Might bring your 80-90% up
>>to 95-98%, especially if time trouble is not an issue.
>
>I remember some time ago there was a game with Shirov versus some other top guy.
>They had an kqkr endgame and the king+queen player was unable to win.
>Now that is a relative easy endgame since there's only four pieces, more
>imperfection with increased complexity would not be unexpected IMO.
>
>-S.
Winning is one thing, not losing is another. You're also forgetting a particular
factor. If he weren't limited to the 50 move rule (and the KQkr ending can take
as many as 38 movbes to win even with best play) he probably would have won. As
I recall he just no longer had enough moves to get the win.
Albert
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.