Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:15:58 02/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 25, 2002 at 01:49:32, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On February 25, 2002 at 00:02:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>I don't "believe" it is impossible to find it from the Kf1 position, I >>_know_ it is impossible for a program to find this perpetual. > >Okay, but then please explain why Fritz, with a 21 ply nominal >search & a 53 ply of extensions returns _exactly_ that: a draw >score. > >-- >GCP Very easy. It believes that one side is losing or winning when it is not, and it believes that the other side would then go for a draw. In this position, if it believes black is winning, then it will conclude that at the first opportunity, white will go for a forced draw. In fact, black is _not_ winning and it is black that is fighting for a draw. I have seen this literally zillions of times. If you believe that a program has "proven" that a position is drawn just because it says 0.00, you are sadly mistaken. It simply means that for this engine, it appears that one side will force a draw because it thinks that side is losing. If it is wrong about the losing, then it will _also_ be wrong about the forced draw. you should be able to construct such a position and see it happen if you try. Something with a deep mate and a shallow perpetual where the mating side is well behind in material. Which means that the perpetual will be forced until the search goes deep enough that it sees that the concept of who is losing was flawed...
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.