Author: Ulrich Tuerke
Date: 12:00:18 06/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 11, 2002 at 13:40:50, Steve Coladonato wrote: >On June 11, 2002 at 12:34:01, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: > >>On June 11, 2002 at 12:12:09, Steve Coladonato wrote: >> >>>Here's the analysis for a position arising out of a Milner-Barry line of the >>>French Defence. I opened up two desktops on Linux and in one ran SCID using >>>crafty for analysis and in the other used Comet for the analysis. I hope I have >>>the correct syntax to get the diagram to display. It took Comet a lot longer >>>than Crafty to get to depth 11 and the line it is displaying is not good for >>>black. >>> >>>Steve >>> >>>[D] r3kbnr/1p1b1ppp/p3p3/3pP3/3q4/2NB4/PP3PPP/R1BQ1R1K b kq - 0 11 >>> >>> Crafty-18.13 >>> Depth: 11 Nodes: 38180437 (122495 n/s) >>> Score: -0.90 Time: 311.69 seconds >>> 11. ... Be7 12. f4 Nh6 13. Qe2 O-O 14. Be3 Qb4 15. Rac1 d4 16. a3 Qc5 >>> >>> 3 -1.27 11. ... Qxe5 12. Re1 Qf6 (0.04) >>> 4 -0.87 11. ... Qxe5 12. Re1 Qd4 13. Qe2 (0.05) >>> 4 -0.87 11. ... Qxe5 12. Re1 Qd4 13. Qe2 (0.16) >>> 5 -1.01 11. ... Qxe5 12. Re1 Qd6 13. Bg5 Nf6 (0.18) >>> 5 -1.01 11. ... Qxe5 12. Re1 Qd6 13. Bg5 Nf6 (0.37) >>> 6 -0.85 11. ... Qxe5 12. Re1 Qd6 13. Bd2 Nf6 14. Rc1 (0.46) >>> 6 -1.02 11. ... Bb4 12. Qe2 Bxc3 13. bxc3 Qxc3 14. Bd2 Qc5 (1.36) >>> 6 -1.02 11. ... Bb4 12. Qe2 Bxc3 13. bxc3 Qxc3 14. Bd2 Qc5 (1.56) >>> 7 -0.88 11. ... Bb4 12. f4 Bxc3 13. bxc3 Qxc3 14. Rb1 b5 15. Be3 (3.77) >>> 7 -0.97 11. ... Nh6 12. f4 Rc8 13. Ne2 Qc5 14. Bd2 Nf5 (6.74) >>> 7 -0.97 11. ... Nh6 12. f4 Rc8 13. Ne2 Qc5 14. Bd2 Nf5 (7.44) >>> 8 -0.92 11. ... Nh6 12. Bxh6 gxh6 13. f4 Rc8 14. Qc2 Ba3 15. bxa3 Rxc3 (10.86) >>> 8 -1.02 11. ... Bb4 12. Rb1 Qxe5 13. Re1 Qd6 14. Qg4 Qc5 15. Qe2 (21.43) >>> 8 -1.02 11. ... Bb4 12. Rb1 Qxe5 13. Re1 Qd6 14. Qg4 Qc5 15. Qe2 (23.35) >>> 9 -0.71 11. ... Bb4 12. Ne2 Qxe5 13. Qb3 Qd6 14. a3 Bc5 15. Qxb7 Bc6 (45.39) >>> 9 -0.92 11. ... Nh6 12. Be3 Qxe5 13. Re1 Qd6 14. Rc1 d4 15. Ne4 Qe5 (62.49) >>> 9 -0.93 11. ... Rc8 12. f4 Nh6 13. Ne2 Qc5 14. b4 Qc7 15. Qd2 Nf5 (71.48) >>> 9 -0.93 11. ... Rc8 12. f4 Nh6 13. Ne2 Qc5 14. b4 Qc7 15. Qd2 Nf5 (73.37) >>> 10 -0.78 11. ... Rc8 12. f4 Nh6 13. Ne2 Qc5 14. b4 Qxb4 15. Rb1 Qa5 16. Rxb7 >>>Qxa2 (83.49) >>> 10 -0.84 11. ... Be7 12. f4 Nh6 13. Re1 Qf2 14. Re2 Qh4 15. g3 Qg4 16. Rd2 >>>Qxd1+ 17. Rxd1 (145.50) >>> 10 -0.84 11. ... Be7 12. f4 Nh6 13. Re1 Qf2 14. Re2 Qh4 15. g3 Qg4 16. Rd2 >>>Qxd1+ 17. Rxd1 (178.45) >>> 11 -0.90 11. ... Be7 12. f4 Nh6 13. Qe2 O-O 14. Be3 Qb4 15. Rac1 d4 16. a3 Qc5 >>>(244.93) >>> 11 -0.90 11. ... Be7 12. f4 Nh6 13. Qe2 O-O 14. Be3 Qb4 15. Rac1 d4 16. a3 Qc5 >>>(311.69) >>> >>>COMET-B46 >>>Depth: 11 Nodes: 44858323 (1274 n/s) >> >>The n/s looks peculiar. So, it took 10 hrs to reach this depth ? > >NO. It took between 10 and 15 mins. to get to this depth. I wasn't watching >closely but it was about 2-3 times what it took crafty to get there. This could be okay. Comet looks to many more nodes per iteration than Crafty. However look at the analysis of the B.46 DOS exe (K6/450). Comet-B.46 Tue Jun 11 21:03:24 2002 depth score sec nodes pv 1. +2.11 0 821 d4e5 2. +1.82 0 2397 f8b4 d1e2 b4c3 b2c3 d4c3 3. +1.95 0 7362 d4e5 f1e1 e5d4 4. +1.82 0 13241 f8b4 d1e2 b4c3 b2c3 d4c3 4. +1.82 0 24885 f8b4 d1e2 b4c3 b2c3 d4c3 5. +1.76 0 45195 f8b4 a2a3 b4a5 d1e2 a5c3 b2c3 d4c3 5. +1.76 1 79838 f8b4 a2a3 b4a5 d1e2 a5c3 b2c3 d4c3 6? +1.62 1 107812 f8b4 d1e2 b4c3 b2c3 d4f2 6? +1.35 3 243750 f8b4 f2f4 b4c3 b2c3 d4a4 6. +1.29 5 384157 f8b4 f2f4 g8e7 d1e2 6. +1.29 6 448879 f8b4 f2f4 g8e7 d1e2 7! +1.42 6 529311 f8b4 f2f4 g8e7 c1d2 7. +1.45 7 592174 f8b4 f2f4 g8e7 c3e2 d4c5 c1d2 f7f5 7. +1.63 8 680819 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 c1g5 f8e7 7. +1.63 9 782412 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 c1g5 f8e7 8? +1.49 10 834465 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d6h2 h1h2 g8f6 8. +1.45 22 1779677 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 8. +1.45 24 1936205 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 9! +1.58 39 3270488 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 e1e6 f7e6 9! +1.85 68 5678830 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 e1e6 f7e6 9? +1.85 69 5756175 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 c1d2 g8f6 9. +1.85 76 6347649 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 c1d2 g8f6 10? +1.71 79 6605750 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 10. +1.66 136 12205057 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 f8e7 10. +1.66 137 12234960 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 f8e7 ==> My Move: d4e5 in 2:17 I suspect very much that I have compiled some mixture of old and new sources on the linux machine, perhaps new c- and old h-files. -:) So, this should really be named Comet-XXX. I wonder how it plays. Uli >> >> >>>Score: -1.32 Time: 35187.00 seconds >>>d4e5! f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 g8f6 d3h7 >>> >>> 6 -0.91 f8b4? f2f4 b4c3 b2c3 d4c3 a1b1 b7b6 b1b6 c3e5 (137.00) >>> 6 -0.84 f8b4 f2f4 b4c3 b2c3 d4c3 a1b1 b7b5 c1b2 (287.00) >>> 6 -0.84 f8b4 f2f4 b4c3 b2c3 d4c3 a1b1 b7b5 c1b2 (325.00) >>> 7 -0.84 f8b4 f2f4 b4c3 b2c3 d4c3 (437.00) >>> 7 -0.97 d4e5! f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 c3a4 g8e7 d3a6 (487.00) >>> 7 -1.13 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 c1g5 f8e7 (525.00) >>> 7 -1.13 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 c1g5 f8e7 (625.00) >>> 8 -0.99 d4e5? f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d6h2 h1h2 f8d6 f2f4 g8f6 (650.00) >>> 8 -0.95 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 (1512.00) >>> 8 -0.95 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 (1725.00) >>> 9 -1.08 d4e5! f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 e1e6 f7e6 c3d5 (2387.00) >>> 9 -1.35 d4e5! f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 e1e6 f7e6 c3d5 (3587.00) >>> 9 -1.35 d4e5? f1e1 e5d6 d1f3 g8f6 c1f4 d6b4 f4e5 f8e7 a1c1 (3725.00) >>> 9 -1.35 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1f3 g8f6 c1f4 d6b4 f4e5 f8e7 a1c1 (4212.00) >>> 10 -1.21 d4e5? f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 (4575.00) >>> 10 -1.19 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 g8f6 c1g5 h7h6 g5h4 (9975.00) >>> 10 -1.19 d4e5 f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 g8f6 c1g5 h7h6 g5h4 (11112.00) >>> 11 -1.32 d4e5! f1e1 e5d6 d1b3 d7c6 h1g1 g8f6 d3h7 (35187.00)
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.