Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 15:05:56 04/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 10, 2003 at 17:02:30, Dieter Buerssner wrote: >On April 10, 2003 at 15:27:49, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >[much snipped] >>On April 10, 2003 at 14:30:51, K. Burcham wrote: >>>Chess Tiger 14.0: >>>31.a4 bxa4 32.Kc3 a3 33.Bc1 a2 34.Bb2 Nxb2 35.Kxb2 a1Q+ 36.Kxa1 axb4 37.Kb2 e4 >>>38.g3 Kb7 39.Kb3 Kc6 40.Kxb4 >>> = (0.12) Depth: 19 00:17:52 587387kN, tb=4 > >>> Fritz 7 (No MMX): >>>31.a4 bxa4 32.Kc3 a3 33.Bc1 a2 34.Bb2 Nxb2 35.Kxb2 axb4 >>> ² (0.38) Depth: 22/47 00:38:50 2834126kN, tb=708 > >>The Chesstiger and Fritz pvs dont convince me at all. > >Why? I find the PVs rather convincing. To me it looks, they are correct for at >least 8 plies (Fritz only shows 8 plies, I did not look at the later plies of >Tiger, but at least a1Q+ Kxa1 seems winning). Perhaps the scores are not >convincing, the PVs are - I think. > >My engine would probably not need years - but many hours. > >Regards, >Dieter From a human point of view 31...axb4 might be a "better move" because after 2.axb5 Na3+ 3.Kb3 f4 black could still fight for draw. There is also the trap 2.Kb3 e4!? 3.Kxb4?? Nxe3 4.fxe3 f4 -+. The PVs seem to result simply in a lost pawn ending for black. As for Computer-Computer games you are probably right. The scores are not convincing of course. Michael
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.