Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 16:30:10 01/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2002 at 18:43:01, Albert Silver wrote: >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 The point is that he didn't play anywhere near perfect. The distance to mate remained almost constant, never dropped below 13 moves if I remember correctly. I find it interesting because, it is one of the few cases we have in which we can compare the best to perfect play. And it was not a very convincing display :( -S.
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.