Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:03:41 11/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 26, 2002 at 10:17:12, Joachim Rang wrote: >well another shootout between DF7 and Crafty 18.14: > > > >Crafty 18.14 - Deep Fritz 7 >for bob, 120'/20+120'/20+60' JOACHIM (1), 26.11.2002 > >W=16.4 ply; 183kN/s; 163.882 TBAs >B=15.9 ply; 747kN/s; 187.425 TBAs > 1.Qxe7+ Ka2 2.Qe6+ 0.00/17 6:19 Qb3 -0.25/16 7:31 3.Qa6+ 0.00/17 6:19 >Kb2 (Kb1) -0.16/17 7:27 4.Qf6 0.00/17 6:19 Kb1 (Ka2) -0.25/16 2:57 5.h4 > 0.00/19 6:21 c2 -0.59/16 2:41 6.Qf5 -0.01/18 12:37 Kb2 -0.44/15 2:34 >7.Qe5+ -0.01/18 35:10 Qc3 -0.09/14 4:52 8.Qb5+ 0.00/16 21:38 Ka3 >-0.28/15 5:02 9.Qa6+ -0.50/16 2:06 Kb3 -0.53/15 5:06 10.Qb6+ -0.43/16 >2:06 Kc4 -0.53/14 2:59 11.Qe6+ -0.43/17 2:06 Kb5 (Kc5) -0.81/15 4:35 >12.Qd5+ -0.41/16 2:06 Ka4 (Kb6) -0.69/15 2:54 13.Qa8+ (Qd7+) -0.28/15 >8:24 13...Kb3 -1.16/15 5:28 14.Qb7+ -0.22/15 1:12 Qb4 -1.97/16 13:41 >15.Qc7 -0.69/16 1:11 Qd4 -4.84/14 3:41 16.Kg2 -4.87/13 1:14 Qd5+ >-5.44/14 4:00 17.Kh2 -5.39/16 1:11 Kb2 -5.34/15 1:46 18.Qb6+ -5.77/15 >1:11 Kc1 -5.94/15 1:38 19.f4 -5.79/12 1:11 Kd2 (Kd1) -7.03/16 4:39 >20.Qf2+ -5.94/13 35 Kc3 -7.09/16 3:49 21.Qe3+ -7.26/15 6:01 Qd3 >-7.22/15 1:57 22.Qc5+ -7.56/14 36:10 Kd2 -8.44/15 4:11 23.Qa5+ -8.44/14 > 4:21 Ke2 -8.50/15 4:25 0-1 > > > >it seems to me, that the win, although forced, takes many moves. But we know >that queenendgames can take very many moves for the winning side. That is all well and good, but it is not answering "the question". A different question: Can a carpenter drive in 100 nails without having one go "sproing" and shooting off somewhere? You get the best carpenter you know and try it and at nail 45, "sproing". You do this a few times and each time you get a "sproing". And you conclude it can't be done. That's not a proof of any sort. For example, several KQPKQ and KNNKP ending positions are probably impossible for a compute to win. This kind of testing methodology would suggest those are all draws. And it would be wrong. Playing a game out proves exactly nothing about the ultimate outcome from the root position. This can be proven as a win by either a human or a program, all they need to do is give analysis with the best black move for each possible white move, to show that _all_ white move at _all_ positions in the tree lead to a loss. Anything else is a "vincent proof".
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.