Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 11:05:14 01/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 04, 2003 at 13:48:22, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On January 04, 2003 at 11:47:36, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>On January 04, 2003 at 10:58:00, Roy Brunjes wrote: >> >>> >>>I have been studying the following position, with the help of various programs, >>>and I am not sure if this is a win for Black. This position was declared a win >>>for Black by some training software I am using. The commentator there says that >>>after: >>> >>> 1. Kg3 Kc2 >>> 2. Kxh3 Kxb2 >>> 3. Kh4 Kxa2 >>> >>> "White needs 8 moves to queen and Black needs only 4" >>> >>>The commentator then goes on to say that if instead of 1. Kg3, white tries 1. >>>b4, that 1. ... Kc4! follows and the game is over. >>> >>>However, as you can see from the pgn I post below, after I forced the first move >>>on each side (1. Kg3 Kc2) Chess Tiger 14 plays 2. b4 and the game seems to be a >>>much tougher win for Black, if indeed a win still exists. Odd how the >>>commentator sees 1. b4 but not the possiblity of 2. b4 after the Black King has >>>gone too far "south" to provide the same defense it could a move earlier. By >>>the way, Tiger wanted to play 1... Ke3 instead of 1. ... Kc2. Given a bit more >>>time, Tiger switches to Ke2 with the following played in the 30+30 shootout I am >>>running: 1. Kg3 Ke2 2. a3 h2 3. Kxh2 Kxf3 4. Kg1 Kxf4 and the eval is hugely in >>>Black's favor. So it would appear that 1. ... Ke2 is superior to the >>>commentator's suggested 1. ... Kc2. >>> >>>I post below the analysis of Chess Tiger 14 (48 MB hash) generated by the H8 GUI >>>option "shootout" with a time control of 10 minutes + 15 seconds per move >>>increment on my 1.6 GHz laptop. Tiger seemed to average about 20-25 seconds per >>>move at this time control. >>> >>>Tiger is a respectable endgame player and it can only see a draw after many >>>moves. Is Tiger right? I am running the shootout again, this time with 30 >>>minutes + 30 seconds per move increment to see if additional time makes any >>>difference in the result. >>> >>>Here is the diagram ... >>> >>>[D] 8/8/6p1/1p3p2/5P2/3k1P1p/PP3K2/8 w >>> >>>And here is the 10+15 shootout output from Chess Tiger 14.0 on my P4 1.6 GHz >>>laptop using 48 MB for hash: >>> >>>1. Kg3 Kc2 2. b4 Kd3 3. a4 bxa4 4. b5 a3 5. b6 a2 6. b7 a1=Q 7. b8=Q Qe1+ 8. >>>Kxh3 Ke3 9. Qe5+ Kf2 10. Kh4 Qh1+ 11. Kg5 Qh5+ 12. Kf6 Kxf3 13. Qd6 Qg4 14. Qd2 >>>Qxf4 15. Qd1+ Kg2 16. Qc2+ Qf2 17. Qc6+ Kh2 18. Qb7 g5 19. Kxg5 f4 20. Qh7+ Kg2 >>>21. Qe4+ f3 22. Kf6 Qb2+ 23. Kf5 Qe2 24. Qg4+ Kf1 25. Kf4 f2 26. Qg6 Qc4+ 27. >>>Kg3 Qc3+ 28. Kh2 Qc7+ 29. Kh3 Qc8+ 30. Kg3 Qb8+ 31. Kh3 Qh8+ 32. Kg3 Qe5+ 33. >>>Kh3 Qe3+ 34. Kh2 Qf4+ 35. Kh3 Qf3+ 36. Kh2 Qd5 37. Qb1+ Ke2 38. Qb2+ Qd2 39. >>>Qe5+ Qe3 40. Qb2+ Ke1 41. Qb1+ Kd2 42. Qa2+ 1/2-1/2 >>> >>>It appears to me that the commentator missed an important continuation for both >>>sides: >>> >>> A. 1. ... Ke2 appears superior to 1. ... Kc2 >>> B. After 1. Kg2 Kc2 it appears that 2. b4! draws >>> >>>What do you folks think? What do your programs think? Thanks for your help! >>> >>>Roy >> >>Hi Roy, >> >>I don't see how it could be a draw. >> >> >>8/8/6p1/1p3p2/5P2/3k1P1p/PP3K2/8 w - - 0 1 >> >>Analysis by Fritz 8: >> >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.b4 >> -+ (-3.06) Depth: 7/11 00:00:00 10kN >>1.Kg3! >> -+ (-2.78) Depth: 8/17 00:00:00 14kN >>1.Kg3 Ke2 2.a3 h2 >> -+ (-2.59) Depth: 8/17 00:00:00 16kN >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-2.87) Depth: 9/14 00:00:00 20kN >>1.Kg3 Ke2 2.a3 h2 3.Kg2 h1Q+ 4.Kxh1 Kxf3 5.Kg1 Kxf4 6.Kf2 g5 7.b3 Ke4 >> -+ (-4.72) Depth: 9/34 00:00:00 42kN, tb=4 >>1.Kg3! >> -+ (-4.44) Depth: 10/24 00:00:00 59kN, tb=4 >>1.Kg3! >> -+ (-4.16) Depth: 10/24 00:00:00 63kN, tb=4 >>1.Kg3! >> -+ (-3.59) Depth: 10/24 00:00:00 68kN, tb=4 >>1.Kg3 Ke2 2.b4 Ke3 3.a3 h2 4.Kxh2 Kxf4 5.Kg2 >> -+ (-2.50) Depth: 10/26 00:00:00 76kN, tb=4 >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-2.81) Depth: 11/22 00:00:00 85kN, tb=4 >>1.Kg3 Ke2 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.b3 Kxf4 5.a4 bxa4 6.bxa4 Ke5 7.a5 Kd6 >> -+ (-2.94) Depth: 11/34 00:00:00 154kN, tb=5 >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-3.22) Depth: 12/28 00:00:00 169kN, tb=6 >>1.Kg3 Ke2 2.a3 h2 3.Kg2 h1Q+ 4.Kxh1 >> -+ (-3.28) Depth: 12/31 00:00:00 219kN, tb=12 >>1.Kg3 Ke2 2.a3 h2 3.Kg2 h1Q+ 4.Kxh1 Kxf3 5.b3 Kxf4 >> -+ (-3.28) Depth: 13/25 00:00:00 318kN, tb=19 >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-3.56) Depth: 14/27 00:00:01 440kN, tb=46 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.b3 Kxf4 5.Kg1 Ke4 6.a4 b4 7.Kf2 g5 >> -+ (-3.81) Depth: 14/42 00:00:01 543kN, tb=63 >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-4.09) Depth: 15/25 00:00:02 640kN, tb=95 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.b3 Kxf4 5.Kg1 Ke4 6.a4 b4 7.Kf1 >> -+ (-4.12) Depth: 15/35 00:00:03 908kN, tb=170 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.b3 Kxf4 5.Kg1 Ke4 6.Kf1 g5 7.a4 >> -+ (-4.22) Depth: 16/29 00:00:04 1254kN, tb=381 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.Kg1 Kxf4 5.Kf2 Ke4 6.b3 g5 7.Kg2 f4 >> -+ (-4.37) Depth: 17/32 00:00:07 1934kN, tb=855 >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-4.66) Depth: 18/31 00:00:09 2507kN, tb=1374 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.Kg1 Kxf4 5.Kf2 g5 6.b3 g4 7.Kg2 Ke5 >> -+ (-4.69) Depth: 18/40 00:00:12 3718kN, tb=2066 >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-4.97) Depth: 19/34 00:00:16 4972kN, tb=2994 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.Kg1 Kxf4 5.Kf2 g5 6.b3 g4 7.Kg2 Ke5 >> -+ (-5.34) Depth: 19/43 00:00:22 7563kN, tb=4909 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.Kg1 Kxf4 5.Kf2 g5 6.b3 g4 7.Kg2 Ke5 >> -+ (-5.34) Depth: 20/36 00:00:33 10416kN, tb=7951 >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-5.62) Depth: 21/39 00:00:45 15682kN, tb=13627 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.Kg1 Kxf4 5.Kf2 g5 6.b3 g4 7.Kg2 Ke3 >> -+ (-9.09) Depth: 21/56 00:01:24 31600kN, tb=26421 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.Kg1 Kxf4 5.Kf2 g5 6.b3 g4 7.Kg2 Ke3 >> -+ (-9.09) Depth: 22/42 00:02:07 46375kN, tb=41661 >>1.Kg3-- >> -+ (-9.37) Depth: 23/45 00:03:24 87234kN, tb=80090 >>1.Kg3 Ke3 2.a3 h2 3.Kxh2 Kxf3 4.Kg1 Kxf4 5.Kf2 Ke4 6.Ke2 f4 7.b3 f3+ 8.Kf1 g5 >>9.Kf2 g4 >> -+ (-9.50) Depth: 23/50 00:04:50 131320kN, tb=130794 >> >>(Irazoqui, MyTown 04.01.2003) > > >Yes, that position is indeed a win for black. But generally, one should always >take computers' endgame analysis with a grain of salt. A few kilos. >The following position should be "closely" familiar to you :-) 5 meters close? :) Enrique > >[D] 4k3/2p5/1p2p1p1/p1p1P1P1/P1P3p1/1P6/5PK1/8 b - - 0 28 > >Deep Fritz - Kramnik,V >4k3/2p5/1p2p1p1/p1p1P1P1/P1P3p1/1P6/5PK1/8 b - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Fritz 7: > >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 Ke8 33.Ke3 Ke7 > ± (1.19) Depth: 12/19 00:00:00 94kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 13/19 00:00:00 148kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 14/21 00:00:00 239kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 15/23 00:00:01 386kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 16/27 00:00:02 609kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 17/31 00:00:03 1034kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 18/31 00:00:05 1588kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 19/33 00:00:09 2543kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 20/36 00:00:16 4231kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 32.Ke4 > ± (1.19) Depth: 21/38 00:00:27 7182kN >28...Kd7 29.Kg3 c6 30.Kxg4 Ke7 31.Kf4 Kf8 > ± (1.19) Depth: 22/39 00:00:48 12441kN > >(David Tabibi, Tel-Aviv 04.01.2003)
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.