Author: Chris Taylor
Date: 06:43:51 08/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 11, 2002 at 08:16:41, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 11, 2002 at 07:14:59, Chris Taylor wrote: > >> >>3R4/8/8/8/2K5/6p1/3p1rk1/8 b - - 0 1 >> >>Analysis by Chess Tiger 14.0: >> >>78...d1Q 79.Rxd1 >> -+ (-23.16) Depth: 8 00:00:00 74kN, tb=23 >> -+ (-#22) Depth: 9 00:00:01 210kN, tb=60 >>78...Rf4+ 79.Kc5 Rf5+ 80.Kb4 d1Q 81.Rxd1 >> -+ (-#21) Depth: 9 00:00:02 647kN, tb=195 >> -+ (-#20) Depth: 11 00:00:08 1950kN, tb=1000 >>78...Kf1 79.Kc3 Ke1 80.Re8+ Re2 81.Rh8 g2 82.Rg8 d1Q 83.Kb4 Rb2+ 84.Kc5 > > >I am interested to see your mate in 4 if white plays >Rg3 or Rg4 and not 83.Kb4 > > Rc2+ >>85.Kb6 Qb1+ 86.Ka7 Ra2# >> -+ (-#19) Depth: 11 00:00:15 4708kN, tb=1967 >> -+ (-#9) Depth: 15 00:07:44 227891kN, tb=43049 >> >>(Taylor, Notts 11.08.2002) >> >>Mate in 9. AMD 1700XP > >I do not believe that the position is mate in 9. > >You should not believe chess programs about the >number of moves to mate because if they do not have >the name chessmaster or yace or crafty they may say >a number that is smaller than the real number. > >Uri I have not been able to mate in 9 with Gambit Tiger 2.0 You are right in your comment, I stand corrected!! Chris Taylor
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.