Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: That's funny

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 21:49:56 10/16/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 17, 2002 at 00:18:02, martin fierz wrote:

>On October 16, 2002 at 22:51:14, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On October 16, 2002 at 20:35:49, martin fierz wrote:
>>
>>>On October 16, 2002 at 18:03:10, Johan De Bock wrote:
>>>
>>>>Last line of the live analysis of game 6 of Kramnik-DF:
>>>>
>>>>Mig: Btw, if white takes the bishop on a6, then b2 is a winning shot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Isn't that funny :-)
>>>
>>>i'm not sure why that should be funny. i have seen no analysis which proves that
>>>the position after b2 is in fact a draw. besides, it looks completely lost,
>>>which is also the reason why kramnik resigned - it's quite natural to assume
>>>that it is lost.
>>>if it is in fact a draw, it is still very doubtful that kramnik would have been
>>>able to hold the endgame as obviously a lot of precision on the white side is
>>>required (unlike the famous DB-kasparov game where kasparov missed a perpetual
>>>check).
>>>
>>>aloha
>>>  martin
>>
>>Why is the DB/Kasparov draw _easier_?  It took a _bunch_ of us, working all
>>night, to
>>prove that Re8 led to a draw, and the line was very precise.  One wrong move and
>>the
>>draw turned into a loss instantly...
>>
>>It doesn't seem that "easy_ to me...
>>
>>It wasn't so easy for Kasparov either.  :)
>
>i guess i'm wrong then :-)
>all i remembered was that people said "kasparov missed a perpetual". and i
>thought i remembered that kasparov was disgusted that he missed it - but my
>memory is of course not very reliable :-)
>a perpetual is something you can calculate. in the kramnik DF potential draw,
>*if* it were possible for white to force that RPP-QP drawn endgame, then it
>would be "easy" in the sense that you can find it at some point, and once you
>have found it it's game over again. however, if white cannot force that endgame,
>then he has to defend RR-QN+passed-pawn, with great accuracy.
>why is one easier than another? because once you see the perpetual, you see it
>and it's a draw - and you cannot lose any more.
>defending a possibly tenable but inferior position on the other hand is *never*
>over. the computer will torture you for 50 or 100 moves (assuming you cannot get
>into this drawn RPP-QP endgame), and any slip will lose the game.
>
>aloha
>  martin




The DB perpetual was very deep.  IE there were many "set-up" moves that had to
be
played perfectly, before the position with the perpetual was reached...  Many of
the moves
are one-only type moves, but they are very difficult to find if you don' t know
they are
there, which is why it took almost 24 hours to convince everyone that this was
drawn.
Everytime a draw was disproven, another was found, until it finally could not be
refuted...

>
>>>
>>>>http://www.fritz7.de/bahrain/english/



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.