Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: endgame blunder by DeepFritz7

Author: Dieter Buerssner

Date: 18:12:16 11/25/02

Go up one level in this thread


On November 25, 2002 at 11:19:50, Uri Blass wrote:

>If you claim a win then you should beat programs with black and not chess tiger
>but programs that claim that it is a draw.
>
>Note that yace did not play 4.f4 in my analysis
>
>After 4.f4 Qc3 Yace feels bad with 4.f5 so finding Qc3 may be a good test
>position

Uri, it is nice to see, that you use Yace. But I really think, in this sort of
endgame, one should not easily trust engines. Some arguments. Assume KQPKQ and
an engine without TBs. Also, ignore for the argument the 50 moves rule. There
are positions in KQPKQ, which need more than 50 moves, until a pawn will
advance. Earlier in this (or in a related) thread, you argued with tactics. When
50 moves are needed (or when 30 moves are needed) until a pawn advances, tactics
will be out of reach for (almost?) any chess engine.

You critizised Tiger for the high eval. I did not look close enough, neither do
I have the knowledge. But in general it seems possible to me, that with rather
sophisticated knowledge in the engine, such a score is reasonable. I don't know,
if Tiger has such sort of knowledge, or if such knowledge is even applicable
here. Perhaps, Tiger was lucky, and in other situations, the same algoritms,
that show +5 here will hurt. Also, as far as I read the threads, it seems not
totally clear yet, if black will win. But arguing with tactics is not valid
here, IMHO.

Regards,
Dieter




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.