Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Some fairly careful analysis of some of the more difficult ECM problems

Author: Miguel A. Ballicora

Date: 10:59:40 05/06/02

Go up one level in this thread


On May 06, 2002 at 04:30:20, Uri Blass wrote:

>>[D]2kr2r1/2pqbp1p/p1n1b3/1P1pP3/4n3/1BP1BN2/1P4PP/RN1Q1RK1 b - - acd 14; acn
>>872957292; acs 1799; bm Bh3; ce 0; id "ECM.1426"; pv Bh3 Ne1 Bxg2 Nxg2 Rxg2+
>>Kxg2 Rg8+ Kh1 Ng3+ Kg1 Ne4+ Kh1;
>
>Another positional problem:

Why do you think is a positional problem? I think it is tactical but deep.
Anyway, In general I do not like this kind of positions because many programs
find the move because they like a draw (perpetual), when the position is a win.
That would score better than a program that is looking for a win (because
positionally thinks it is better) but still did not find how to win.
For instance, it was shown that there are other ways to get a draw score in this
position. It was discussed some time ago. People thought there were some cooks
because they believed that the goal was a draw.

In other words, a test like this might introduce some noise and should not be
present in a very high quality test suite, IMHO.

Regards,
Miguel



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.