Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:03:39 09/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 11, 2002 at 11:48:38, nabin limbu wrote: >[D]r1b4k/1pqp3p/2p1p1pP/P1P1P1P1/5P2/1Q6/6K1/3RB3 w - - 0 71 >Do we see a problem here????????? > by D.fritz6 96mb hash DAUL P!!! sd ram 512 72.Rd6 Kf8.73......+-2.15 in 11sec >fritz 7 32mb hash XP-2200+ ddr 512mb 72.Qb6 Q*b6......+-1.66 in 19sec?????is it >that you want to see or should we have to call back the engine programmers to >make move the positions .??????? I agree that these moves are winning. My program chose in the game Qb6 and won the game against averno but I believe that Rd6 is winning faster and I am not sure if it could win against better defence espacially when null move pruning is used. I suspect that program can after Qb6 Qxb6 waste time without finding the win inspite of believing that they have an advantage. I think that good programs can see here significant increase in score after a long time. I remember that tiger14 failed high on Qc4 and a possible line could be Qc4 Kg8 Bc3 with the idea of playing later f5. I believe that white has a mate attack here but programs cannot see a big increase in score in a few minutes and in some cases they even cannot see an increase in the score in few hours. Movei could not see something better than Qb6 even after some hours and after finishing depth 18. The score was slightly more than +2 but only for positional reasons. Uri
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.