Author: Johanes Suhardjo
Date: 11:04:47 06/25/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 1998 at 13:35:47, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>
>On June 18, 1998 at 06:28:48, Ernst A. Heinz wrote:
>
>>On June 18, 1998 at 04:16:15, blass uri wrote:
>>>On June 17, 1998 at 14:49:15, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>
>>>>black to move
>>>>
>>>>position white Kh3,Ra4,a2,f4,g3,h4
>>>> black Kc4,Rc3,b4,e6,f5,g6
>>>> black to move wins easily
>>>>
>>>>Believe it or not, diep managed to lost this as it didn't play Ra3,
>>>>it played Re3.
>>>>This is so simple, but i haven't worked at endgame yet.
>>>
>>>Fritz5 is not better in this position it needed more than 80 seconds
>>>to find Ra3 is winning
>>>before that(after 1 minute on my pentium 200MMX) it prefered Re3
>>>It intended to play Ra3 without seeing it is winning after some
>>>seconds but change its mind
>>
>>That's really surprising because it actually is so simple.
>>
>>"DarkThought" fails high on 1. Ra3! in iteration #9 after less
>>than 1 sec.
>
>I don't know what is going on here either. Mine gets Ra3 in < 1 second on a
>P6/200, with a score of +2, has +4 in 6 seconds, and has +7 in 38 seconds.
>
>Is this because Fritz is doing null move in K+P endings or something?
>
>bruce
Wow! How did you guys do it? It is a 9-ply sequence, isn't it? Do your
programs finish 9 plies in less than 1 second? My program on a 170 MHz
Sun Ultra 1 can't find it even after 11 plies in zillions of seconds. It
was too involve in enjoying itself with the lines after e5 fxe f4 etc.
Johanes Suhardjo (johanes@farida.cc.nd.edu)
--
Maybe you can't buy happiness, but these days you can certainly charge it.
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.