Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 09:11:12 03/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 07, 2002 at 10:44:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 07, 2002 at 00:24:32, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On March 06, 2002 at 23:46:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On March 06, 2002 at 17:26:05, Terry McCracken wrote: >>> >>>>On March 06, 2002 at 17:07:51, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 06, 2002 at 16:55:53, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On March 06, 2002 at 15:59:21, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On March 06, 2002 at 13:55:14, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On March 06, 2002 at 13:09:05, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On March 06, 2002 at 11:20:17, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>[D]8/8/8/8/8/6P1/6k1/4KR1R w >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Mate in 3 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Terry >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>This is a mate in 4, not a mate in 3, as confirmed by EGTBs... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Dr. Hyatt with all due respect, EGTBs will _not_ help you with this type >>>>>>>>of problem. EGTBs look at it as an endgame where it's assumed the King and both >>>>>>>>Rooks have been moved. Maybe EGTBs can be adjusted for this situation? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Castling is the correct solution, which forces mate in 3. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>BTW CM8000 in mate mode or in normal mode will find mate in 3 instantly! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>This problem created 145 years ago by Samuel Lloyd when he was not yet 16 years >>>>>>>>of age, is still considered one of the most famous problems in chess history. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>http://www.chessbase.com/puzzle/puzzle9/puzz9-6a.htm >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The solution can be found at this link. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>http://www.chessbase.com/puzzle/puzzle9/games/p9_6.htm >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Regards, >>>>>>>> Terry McCracken >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Sorry, but if you check the +EPD+ posted for the position, there is _no_ >>>>>>>castling possible. Which means this is a simple mate in 4 and the EGTB >>>>>>>results are perfect. >>>>>> >>>>>>You've got to be joking!? If it's the fault of how I set the diagram, please >>>>>>forgive me! >>>>>> >>>>>>Forget FEN, Forget EPD and look at it as a _position only_ with the only clue >>>>>>Mate in 3! >>>>>> >>>>>>I'll check the rules on what is or is not needed at the end of the FEN. >>>>>> >>>>>>But really, you must have understood my intent and that this _position_ >>>>>>forgeting the *Rule Base* for FEN and or EPD is a mate in 3? >>>>> >>>>>Actually I didn't give it much thought, because the idea of grabbing a >>>>>position that is not legal never entered my mind. In the position you gave, >>>>>white has no castling rights by the FEN string, and white has no rook to >>>>>castle with either. Also it is not exactly "white to move" because white >>>>>has already started to make a move but has not completed it. >>>>> >>>>>Which was my point in the first place... what is the interest in grabbing >>>>>a position on the board at some random point in time, rather than grabbing it >>>>>only when one side is to move in a legal position? >>>>> >>>>>How convoluted! Please! I agree you gave it little thought, except for your >>>>defence! >>> >>> >>>I gave it all the thought it deserved. I assume _legal_ positions. I don't >>>care for positions with rooks "in transit" or any other such nonsense since >>>FEN does _not_ allow for such, and for good reason... >>> >>So? Why trample on a composition of Beauty? > >I didn't trample on _anything_. I pointed out that you had posted an >invalid FEN position and that was that. > Then explain how please to give the correct FEN for this position, thanks. > >> >>Look at the position for what it is. A very clever composition! > >I believe I gave you credit for something "clever". But I also pointed out >that it was "broken" according to the precise specification for FEN position >strings. > >Ok I made a note of that and gave you a reply somewhere here!:) > >>> >>> >>>> >>>>I was unaware of these rules with FEN when I posted....I thought maybe you would >>>>see my error, (In this case not knowing the FEN Rules) and understand I was >>>>setting up a Mate in 3 Problem and to attempt to solve it! >>>> >>>>Of course this means you would look at it as if I set it up on a *Real* board >>>>and said look Bob; Here's a mate in 3 White to Move, do you see it? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Now try your EGTBs with the castling rule, thanks! >>>>> >>>>>EGTBs don't include castling because it would be a waste of time and >>>>>space. >>>>> >>>>>Yes I guess it would be 99.999% of the time. >>>>>> >>>>>>Terry
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.