Author: Dieter Buerssner
Date: 06:08:48 06/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 2002 at 01:00:30, Will Singleton wrote:
>On June 09, 2002 at 00:28:44, Peter Kappler wrote:
>
>>On June 08, 2002 at 23:47:41, Will Singleton wrote:
>>
>>>[D]4Q3/1q3ppk/2Nb4/1p4pb/2n5/2P4P/1P3PP1/R5K1 b - -
>>>
>>>Amateur 2 plays Qc7 at 70 sec. The first amateur program who can beat this
>>>time, or find a better move, gets a copy of Hsu's new book, when available.
>>>Must be submitted by the author.
>>>
>>
>>Grok switches from Nxb2 to Bc5 after 50 seconds, and starts returning a
>>drawscore at ply 10. Don't know if Bc5 is better than Qc7...
>> 8 11 14.411s 3262810 226knps Nxb2 Ra8 g4 Ra7 Qb6 hxg4 Bg6 Qd7
>> 9 -1 50.322s 13361462 266knps Bc5 Ra8 Qc7 Qh8+ Kg6 Rg8 f5 b4 Bd6 Rc8
>> 9 -1 80.095s 20862554 260knps Bc5 Ra8 Qc7 Qh8+ Kg6 Rg8 f5 b4 Bd6 Rc8
>> 10 0 119.101s 32176831 270knps Bc5 Ra8 Qc7 Qh8+ Kg6 Rg8 Bxf2+ Kxf2
>>Qf4+ Kg1 Qc1+ Kh2 Qf4+ <h2>
>>
>>Hardware: AMD 1.4 GHz
>>
>>-Peter
>
>You win. I tested other engines on this, Yace, Pepeito, Leila, Beowulf, and
>Sjeng. Nothing close to your result.
Strange. I think on your hardware, Yace should be faster. On my AMD K6-2 475,
Yace 0.99.56, default settings, 40M hash:
105361 1.190 0.85 6-- 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 Ba3
116216 1.254 0.85 6t 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 {200}
212775 1.844 0.85 6. 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 {200}
366857 2.785 0.84 7t 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 g4 3. Ra7 Qb6 4. hxg4 Bg6 {120}
548738 3.769 0.84 7. 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 g4 3. Ra7 Qb6 4. hxg4 Bg6 {120}
1039554 6.646 0.95 8t 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 g4 3. Ra7 Qb6 4. hxg4 Bxg4 5.
Rxf7 Nc4 {120}
1440105 8.951 0.95 8. 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 g4 3. Ra7 Qb6 4. hxg4 Bxg4 5.
Rxf7 Nc4 {120}
2045749 12.794 0.55 9-- 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 g4 3. hxg4 Bxg4 4. Ra7 Kg6 5.
Rxb7 Nc4 {-801}
2782092 17.162 0.54 9t 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 g4 3. hxg4 Bxg4H 4. Ra7H Qc8H
5. Qxf7H Qf8H 6. Qd5H {120}
8115784 50.581 0.54 9. 1...Nxb2 2. Ra8 g4 3. hxg4 Bxg4 4. Ra7 Qc8 5.
Qxf7 Qf8 6. Qd5 {120}
11512319 1:12.6 0.14 10-- 1...Nxb2 2. g4 Bg6 3. Ra8 Kh6 4. Ra7 Qxc6 5.
Qxc6 Be4 6. Qxe4 Nc4 {-811}
12688502 1:20.9 -0.86 10-- 1...Nxb2 2. g4 Bg6 3. Ra8 Kh6 4. Ra7 Qxc6 5.
Qxc6 Be4 6. Qxe4 Nc4 {-811}
16608588 1:47.6 -1.74 10t 1...Nxb2 2. g4 Bc5 3. gxh5 Na4 4. c4 Nc3 5. Ra8
Ne2+ 6. Kf1 Nf4 {-150}
18656315 2:00.3 -1.73 10t+ 1...Qc7 2. Qe4+ Bg6 3. Ne5
27721677 3:04.6 0.00 10t 1...Qc7 2. Ra7 Bh2+ 3. Kh1 Qf4 4. Ra8 Qc1+ 5.
Kxh2 Qf4+ 6. Kh1H Qxf2H 7. Qh8+H Kg6H 8. Ra6H
{HT} {-150}
46660154 5:14.4 0.00 10. 1...Qc7 2. Ra7 Bh2+ 3. Kh1 Qf4 4. Ra8 Qc1+ 5.
Kxh2 Qf4+ 6. Kh1 Qxf2 7. Qh8+ Kg6 8. Ra6 {HT}
{-150}
So, 120 seconds. I would think that your hardware is at least 4 times faster.
Regards,
Dieter
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.