Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 12:46:38 01/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 17, 2003 at 14:54:30, Aaron Gordon wrote: >On January 17, 2003 at 12:45:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 17, 2003 at 10:42:33, Joshua Lee wrote: >> >>>bm axb5 - NOLOT #6 >>>rnbqk2r/1p3ppp/p7/1NpPp3/QPP1P1n1/P4N2/4KbPP/R1B2B1R b kq - 0 1 >>> >>>Analysis by Fritz 7: >>> >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.Ng5 Nb6 4.Ndxf7 Kg8 >>> = (-0.16) Depth: 6/35 00:00:00 366kN >>>1...Nd7-- >>> = (0.12) Depth: 7/28 00:00:00 391kN >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.Nxc8 b5 4.cxb5 Rxc8 5.Qxa6 cxb4 >>> ² (0.69) Depth: 7/28 00:00:00 427kN >>>1...axb5! >>> ² (0.66) Depth: 7/37 00:00:02 989kN >>>1...axb5! >>> ² (0.50) Depth: 7/37 00:00:02 992kN >>>1...axb5! >>> = (0.19) Depth: 7/37 00:00:02 999kN >>>1...axb5 2.Qxa8 Na6 3.h3 Nc7 4.Qa5 >>> = (0.09) Depth: 7/37 00:00:02 1004kN >>>1...axb5-- >>> ² (0.37) Depth: 8/31 00:00:02 1124kN >>>1...axb5 >>> ² (0.37) Depth: 8/31 00:00:02 1133kN >>>1...axb5 2.Qxa8 Na6 3.cxb5 Nc7 4.Qb8 cxb4 5.axb4 f6 6.h3 >>> ² (0.50) Depth: 9/30 00:00:06 2430kN >>>1...axb5-- >>> ± (0.78) Depth: 10/35 00:00:12 5037kN >>>1...axb5 >>> ± (0.78) Depth: 10/35 00:00:12 5093kN >>>1...Nd7! >>> ± (0.75) Depth: 10/35 00:00:13 5464kN >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.Nxc8 b5 4.cxb5 Rxc8 5.h3 axb5 6.Qd1 >>> ² (0.69) Depth: 10/35 00:00:13 5799kN >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.h3 Nb6 4.Qe8+ Qxe8 5.Nxe8 Kxe8 6.hxg4 Bd4 7.Nxd4 exd4 >>>8.bxc5 Nxc4 >>> ² (0.50) Depth: 11/40 00:00:35 16021kN >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.Nxc8 Ndf6 4.Qa5 Qxc8 5.h3 Bd4 6.Nxd4 cxd4 7.Kf3 Ne3 8.Bxe3 >>>dxe3 >>> ² (0.66) Depth: 12/39 00:01:01 28254kN >>>1...Nd7! >>> ² (0.37) Depth: 13/42 00:02:50 80884kN >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.Nxc8 Bd4 4.Nxd4 exd4 5.Nd6 d3+ 6.Kxd3 Nf2+ 7.Kc2 Nxh1 >>>8.Nxb7 Qe7 >>> ² (0.31) Depth: 13/42 00:03:13 92105kN >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.h3 Nb6 4.Nxb7 Bxb7 5.Qb3 Bd4 6.Nxd4 exd4 7.hxg4 Qf6 8.bxc5 >>> ² (0.47) Depth: 14/43 00:06:54 200200kN >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.h3 Nb6 4.Nxb7 Bxb7 5.Qb3 Bd4 6.Nxd4 exd4 7.hxg4 Qf6 8.bxc5 >>> ² (0.47) Depth: 15/47 00:19:29 569978kN >>>1...Nd7-- >>> ± (0.75) Depth: 16/48 00:38:08 1119117kN >>>1...Nd7 2.Nd6+ Kf8 3.h3 Nb6 4.Nxb7 Bxb7 5.Qb3 Nd7 6.hxg4 Bg3 7.Rh3 Bf4 8.Kf2 >>> ± (0.81) Depth: 16/51 01:09:25 2057428kN >>>1...axb5! >>> ± (0.78) Depth: 16/51 01:14:45 2209222kN >>>1...axb5! >>> ² (0.62) Depth: 16/51 01:18:18 2310468kN >>>1...axb5 2.Qxa8 Qc7 3.h3 Bd4 4.Ra2 Nf6 5.Nxd4 cxd4 6.Kf3 bxc4 7.Qa5 Qxa5 8.bxa5 >>> ² (0.41) Depth: 16/51 01:28:34 2601340kN >>>1...axb5 2.Qxa8 Qc7 3.h3 Bd4 4.Ra2 Nf6 5.Nxd4 cxd4 6.Kf3 bxc4 7.Qa5 Qxa5 >>> ² (0.34) Depth: 17/50 03:11:19 5594783kN >>>1...axb5 2.Qxa8 Qc7 3.Rb1 Bd4 4.bxc5 Qxc5 5.Qxb8 0-0 6.Rb4 Nf2 7.Nxd4 Nxh1 >>>8.Qxe5 >>> ² (0.37) Depth: 18/55 07:10:51 12610578kN >>> >>>(Lee, Kingpawn 07.01.2003) >> >> >>That doesn't look "solved". IE .37 is not winning anything. The score seems to >>be >>dropping iteration by iteration in fact... which causes the best move to change, >>but maybe >>not for the right reason. > >How do we know that the person that played the move in the first place didn't >see something else and then see the winning line later a few moves after playing >axb5? The GM could have been playing through for the same reasons Fritz was and >only later found that it was infact winning. It was a big home preparation line. It's not all _that_ hard for a computer to think that axb5 is the best move in the position, but finding the next move, Bd4, is probably too difficult for any computer today. Certainly, they won't find it with any kind of decent score. The line Fritz gives there is pretty pointless, and isn't going to win anything.
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.