Author: martin fierz
Date: 12:42:14 11/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 06, 2002 at 14:51:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 06, 2002 at 13:58:24, martin fierz wrote: > >>On November 06, 2002 at 11:15:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On November 06, 2002 at 03:43:58, martin fierz wrote: >>> >>>>On November 06, 2002 at 00:02:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 05, 2002 at 14:17:55, martin fierz wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 05, 2002 at 01:18:07, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>There is interesting and quite long analysis about game 2. which Kramnik won. >>>>>>>They claim, that after whites 35. Rc5, there is no need for black to lose: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>[D]r7/3k1ppp/8/p1R1p3/Pp2P3/5PP1/1P5P/4K3 b - - >>>>>>> >>>>>>>According to analysis 35.-Rc8 draws! Really? >>>>>> >>>>>>Rc8 is obviously the best move in this position. shortly after the game i posted >>>>>>this position asking if any program can find this move - only bob answered >>>>>>saying that if a position is lost it doesnt matter what move you make (hmm, >>>>>>sounds rather stupid to me...). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Sorry to sound "stupid" but my point was that trying to find a "good" move >>>>>after the game is lost is not very interesting. Much better to try to find >>>>>a good move _prior_ to things going south. >>>>> >>>>>Rc8 might be good enough to draw. I'm not so sure being a pawn down with an >>>>>active rook is that great if your opponent has a rook that is causing problems >>>>>as well. I would rather try to find something _earlier_ in the game... >>>> >>>>that still sounds a bit stupid to me :-) every chess player gets into positions >>>>where he wishes he had done something different earlier in the game. but then >>>>the right reaction is not to kick yourself for the earlier mistake, but instead >>>>to fight as well as you still can and make things hard for your opponent. >>>> >>>>you can also just see it as a test position which has no reference to what >>>>happened earlier in the game. black to move and fight for the draw! the >>>>discussion then was whether kramnik was playing specifically anti-fritz or not, >>>>i.e. whether it was really such a big help that he got the *exact* copy before >>>>the match. i still dont't think so, and this position is one of the reasons. >>>>which computer will play Rc8 here? my guess: not one. which means that kramnik's >>>>strategy (as seen in games 1-4, but no more later) would have worked against >>>>most other computers too... >>>> >>>>aloha >>>> martin >>> >>> >>>I suspect it _would_ have worked. I'm not particularly worried by this >>>position, because >>>it requires dumping a pawn for a little activity, which is not going to be easy >>>to implement. >> >>this is really a standard idea in rook endings. it's not like this is a "one in >>a million" position... >> >>>The work spent on getting a program to do that in the right way will be _far_ >>>greater than >>>the work required to avoid the entire sub-tree earlier in the game, which was my >>>point. This >>>is about "economy of effort" more than anything else. >> >>which may be right for this particular game. but rook endings are the most >>common endings, and this is a very common theme in rook endings. >> >>aloha >> martin > > >It's a common theme, but it is also very "special-case". For every position >where giving >up a pawn for activity is right, there are cases where it is also wrong. that may be true, but then the challenge is obviously to find an evaluation function which knows which case is which... >That's the problem I was talking about. And once you choose to give up the >pawn, you are >committed, right or wrong. Until then you have options. not true. in this position, after ...Rc8 Rxsome pawn Rc2, the white king is trapped on the back rank. which is surely a big help for the defending side. you cannot wait until white has activated his king - you don't have the option of saccing that pawn any time you like. aloha martin
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.