Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 15:44:51 03/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 07, 2002 at 00:37:22, Slater Wold wrote: >On March 06, 2002 at 23:37:15, Robert Hyatt 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]8/8/8/8/8/6P1/6k1/4KR1R w K - >>> >>>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: >>> >>>1.+ - (#4) Rf4 <snip other moves> >>>_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. >> >> >>You are also 100% wrong. >> >>Ask Eugene... he wrote the code. Castling is _not_ included. > >All I know is that without using an engine, (yes, in CB you can do that) TB's >return o-o. Or _something_ does. > >EUGENE......................... The root position is a MATE IN _3_ if you include castling. You can see that the TBs are returning MATE IN _4_, because they don't include castling. IF CASTLING WERE INCLUDED, YOU'D SEE #3 FROM THE ROOT POSITION. :) That's all.
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.