Author: Slater Wold
Date: 19:49:38 03/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 06, 2002 at 22:27:17, Uri Blass wrote: >On March 06, 2002 at 19:18:16, Slater Wold wrote: > >>Hyatt said in an earlier post that TB's don't take into account the ability to >>castle because it would be a waste. >> >>However, when I feed this position into any engine, it solves it in 0.00 as a TB >>win. >> >>[D]5Q1Q/5Q1Q/5Q1Q/5Q1Q/8/6P1/6k1/4KR1R w K - > >Your FEN is wrong and we need to imagine that all the white queens that you >copied from dann corbit's post are missing. You're right. But obviously this is not the position I am talking about, because I don't have the 13 man TB's. :) >>It shows 20 possible moves, all from TB's I am guessing. >> >>I cannot cut and paste the eval, because there isn't one, but I have: ><snipped> >>1.+ - (#4) Rf4 > >This is not correct and the program that you use has bugs. >It should not call tablebases in a position that is not in the >tablebases(castling is legal) > > >_Several_ of these moves take castling into accout. >> >>After Rf4 Kxg3 my TB's show 28 moves. The first move is 1. + - (#2) O-O, the >>last is 28. + - (#15) Rh8. >> >>I am 100% sure TB's do indeed take castling into consideration. > > >No >You do not understand how tablebases work. >There are no moves in tablebases. > >The engine generates all the legal moves and looks in the tablebases after these >moves to see distance to mate. Um, well, according to Hyatt, it would tell the TB "o-o" and it wouldn't return anything. I am very well aware how TB's work. >If castling is legal then the engine looks at the tablebases to see the distance >to mate after castling in order to see the mate in 2 score. According to Hyatt, no it doesn't. >Uri The correct position is: [D]8/8/8/8/8/6P1/6k1/4KR1R w K - Sorry.
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.