Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:19:06 02/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2002 at 16:29:48, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On February 19, 2002 at 10:56:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>Test your hypothesis. Others already have and after a _week_ of searching >>they found exactly _nothing_. 60 plies is too deep for something that is not >>narrow and forced. And even for something forced, 60 plies is very tough to >>touch except for what are often called "straightjacket" positions where both >>sides have one legal move for an extended period of time. >> >>You aren't going to find _this_ draw in 24 hours from the original position >>where they moved their king to the wrong square. I don't care what kind of >>hardware you have. > >Is it really 60 ply? The analysis on the Rebel site claims 36 plies. > >Just for the hell of it, I'm letting ChessTiger 14.0 run for a few days >or so on my XP 1800 on this position. > >It's at ply 20 right now. You know what's really interesting? It's >having a branching factor of LESS than 2 here. > >-- >GCP I am not sure what we mean by "ply" here. IIRC the deepest variations go to 60 plies to reach a draw by repetition. The 36 ply you quote _might_ be the depth Rebel would need to be able to reach 60 plies in the critical variations, I am not sure.
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.