Author: James T. Walker
Date: 09:51:30 01/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 2003 at 08:30:05, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On January 21, 2003 at 07:48:51, James T. Walker wrote: > >>Here is the analysis by Fritz 8. The first few moves are perfect and I really >>believe that Fritz 8 would win this ending easily. >> >>New game >>8/1p1R2pk/5p2/7P/7P/5Kn1/4r3/8 b - - 0 1 >> >>Analysis by Fritz 8: >> >>1...b5 2.Rb7 Re5 3.Kxg3 Rxh5 4.Kg4 Kg6 5.Kf3 >> -+ (-1.47) Depth: 7/14 00:00:00 28kN >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 3.Rd4 b5 4.Rb4 Kh6 5.Kg4 >> -+ (-1.88) Depth: 8/16 00:00:00 51kN >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 3.Rd4 b5 4.Rb4 Kh6 5.Kg4 >> -+ (-1.88) Depth: 8/16 00:00:00 51kN >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 3.Rd4 b5 4.Rb4 Kh6 5.Kg4 >> -+ (-1.88) Depth: 8/16 00:00:00 51kN >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 3.Rd4 b5 4.Rb4 Kh6 5.Kg4 Rb7 >> -+ (-1.81) Depth: 9/17 00:00:00 101kN >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 3.Rd4 b5 4.Rb4 Kh6 5.Kg4 Rb7 6.Re4 >> -+ (-1.97) Depth: 10/21 00:00:00 208kN >>1...Re8! >> -+ (-2.25) Depth: 11/20 00:00:00 409kN, tb=2 >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 3.Rd4 b5 4.Rb4 Kh6 5.Kg4 >> -+ (-2.19) Depth: 12/20 00:00:01 832kN, tb=17 >>1...Re8-- >> -+ (-1.91) Depth: 13/24 00:00:02 1749kN, tb=171 >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 >> -+ (-1.91) Depth: 13/25 00:00:03 1927kN, tb=174 >>1...Re8! >> -+ (-2.19) Depth: 14/25 00:00:06 4103kN, tb=595 >>1...Re8-- >> -+ (-1.91) Depth: 15/26 00:00:12 7285kN, tb=2014 >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 >> -+ (-1.91) Depth: 15/26 00:00:13 7914kN, tb=2061 >>1...Re8! >> -+ (-2.19) Depth: 16/28 00:00:26 17073kN, tb=5446 >>1...Re8! >> -+ (-2.47) Depth: 17/32 00:00:49 30631kN, tb=13041 >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 3.Kf4 b5 4.Ke3 b4 5.Kd2 b3 6.Kc1 b2+ 7.Kb1 Kh6 8.Rd5 Rb7 >>9.Rc5 Rb6 10.Rd5 Rb3 >> -+ (-2.34) Depth: 18/33 00:01:34 63970kN, tb=32815 >>1...Re8 2.Kxg3 Rb8 3.Kf4 b5 4.Ke3 b4 5.Kd2 b3 6.Kc1 b2+ 7.Kb1 Kh6 8.Rd5 Rb7 >>9.Rc5 Rb6 10.Rd5 Rb8 >> -+ (-2.41) Depth: 19/54 00:03:09 144284kN, tb=78986 >> >>(, 21.01.2003) > > >This PV is garbage. All this shows is that F8 likes 61...Re8, because all it >could find was a weak defense for White (63. Kf4), which does zip to resist the >formation of connected passed pawns on the K-side for Black. Like I said, chess >programs are clueless when it comes to Rook endings. Also, the fact that it does >not switch to 61...Re8 until ply 8 is suggests that it likes 61...Re8 for the >wrong reasons. I assume you are at least a Master and know what you are talking about. Since I'm only a weak beginner I am tempted to take your word for it. What bothers me about your post and I see this often in chess magazines, is that you seem to think that your way is the only way and every thing else is wrong. The fact that it finds the right move in "0" seconds says something for the program since most all others don't find it at all. Doing 8 plies in about 0.1 seconds is nothing to complain about. Since computers don't have human traits such as intuition they have to gather some information before they can make the right decision. As you yourself say below, just adding a bonus for getting the Rook behind a passed pawn is not enough. So why would you want the computer to pick Re8 without searching several plies first? Do you expect it to see the win to the end of the game in 2 or 3 ply? > >The basic problem with Rook endings for programs is that they are strategic in >nature and to make up the difference, programs need to calculate to a depth that >is beyond what they can do. Just adding a bonus for getting a Rook behind a >passed Pawn is not enough, because it happens often enough that this is not even >the right idea and that bonus will then work against the program instead of for >it. I'm sure you are right but I still believe Fritz 8 would win this endgame vs another program or probably even you. Jim
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.