Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 05:47:47 04/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 18, 2003 at 17:43:35, John Merlino wrote:
>On April 18, 2003 at 17:35:25, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>
>>On April 18, 2003 at 15:46:04, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>>
>>> 8/6Q1/8/1R5p/8/4r3/8/1K1kq3 w - - 0 1
>>
>>Yace does not find a mate within an hour, but at least a rather convincing
>>score:
>>
>>[nodes time score depth]
>> 90238839 1:56.1 0.00 11. 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Qd5+ Rd2 3. Qxh5+ Qe2 4. Qxe2+
>> {EGTB} 4...Rxe2 5. Rc5 Rf2 6. Rd5+ Rd2 7. Re5
>> Re2 8. Rf5 Rg2 9. Rh5 Rg3 10. Rh6 Rg4 11. Rh7
>> Rg5 12. Rh8 Rg6 13. Rf8 Rh6 14. Rg8 Rh7 15. Rf8
>> Rg7 16. Rh8 Rf7 17. Rg8 Rh7 18. Rf8 Rg7 19. Rh8
>> Rf7 20. Rg8 Rh7 {repetition} {0}
>> 106141646 2:26.1 0.01 12t 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 {HT}
>> 328388697 7:35.7 0.01 12. 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8
>> 341239835 7:55.1 0.41 13++ 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 Qe2 4. Qh1+ Qe1
>> 5. Qxh5+ Qe2 6. Qh1+ Qe1 7. Qf3+ Qe2 8. Qc6 Qe3
>> 9. Qa4+ Ke2 10. Re8 Rd4 11. Rxe3+ Kd2 12. Qa2+
>> Kxe3 {501}
>> 343566389 7:58.0 1.41 13++ 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 h4 4. Qg4+ Qe2 5.
>> Qa4+ Ke1 6. Qxh4+ Kd1 7. Qh1+ Qe1 8. Qf3+ Qe2
>> 9. Qc6 Qe3 10. Qa4+ Ke2 11. Re8 Rd4 12. Rxe3+
>> Kf2 13. Qa2+ Kxe3 {501}
>> 345247243 8:00.9 6.41 13++ 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 h4 4. Qg4+ Qe2 5.
>> Qa4+ Ke1 6. Qxh4+ Kd1 7. Qh1+ Qe1 8. Qf3+ Qe2
>> 9. Qc6 Qe3 10. Qa4+ Ke2 11. Re8 Rd4 12. Rxe3+
>> Kf2 13. Qa2+ Kf1 {1001}
>> 353650188 8:12.2 9.95 13t 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 h4 4. Qg4+ Qe2 5.
>> Qa4+ Ke1 6. Qxh4+ Kd1 7. Qh1+ Qe1 8. Qf3+ Qe2
>> 9. Qc6 Qe3 10. Qa4+ Ke2 11. Re8 Kf2 12. Rxe3
>> Kg1 13. Qc2 Rd8 {HT}
>> 934614742 20:41.5 9.95 13. 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 h4 4. Qg4+ Qe2 5.
>> Qa4+ Ke1 6. Qxh4+ Kd1 7. Qh1+ Qe1 8. Qf3+ Qe2
>> 9. Qc6 Qe3 10. Qa4+ Ke2 11. Re8 Kf2 12. Rxe3
>> Kg1 13. Qc2 Rd8
>> 948156524 20:59.9 10.35 14++ 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 h4 4. Qg4+ Qe2 5.
>> Qa4+ Ke1 6. Qxh4+ Kd1 7. Qh1+ Qe1 8. Qf3+ Qe2
>> 9. Qc6 Qe3 10. Qa4+ Ke2 11. Re8 Rc2 12. Rxe3+
>> Kd1
>> 948446295 21:00.4 11.35 14++ 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 h4 4. Qg4+ Qe2 5.
>> Qa4+ Ke1 6. Qxh4+ Kd1 7. Qh1+ Qe1 8. Qf3+ Qe2
>> 9. Qc6 Qe3 10. Qa4+ Ke2 11. Re8 Rb2+ 12. Kxb2
>> Kd3 13. Rxe3+ Kd2
>> 949512300 21:02.0 16.35 14++ 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 h4 4. Qg4+ Qe2 5.
>> Qa4+ Ke1 6. Qxh4+ Kd1 7. Qh1+ Qe1 8. Qf3+ Qe2
>> 9. Qc6 Qe3 10. Qa4+ Ke2 11. Re8 Rb2+ 12. Kxb2
>> Kd3 13. Rxe3+ Kd2
>> 984626898 21:47.3 18.97 14t 1. Qg2 Re2 2. Rd5+ Rd2 3. Rd8 h4 4. Qg4+ Qe2 5.
>> Qa4+ Ke1 6. Qxh4+ Kd1 7. Qh1+ Qe1 8. Qf3+ Qe2
>> 9. Qc6 Qe1 10. Qc1+ Ke2 11. Re8+ Kf3 12. Rxe1
>> Rd8 13. Qd1+ Kf4 14. Qxd8 Kf5 {1501}
>>
>>
>>With such a good score, Yace will also not try hard to find a mate (it tries
>>hard to find a good move for the losing side, instead).
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dieter
>
>Actually, with Yace's final PV, should it have been able to give a mating result
>based on tablebases? There are only four pieces on the board after 14.Qxd8 in
>the last PV.
>
>From what I can tell, I THINK White has a mate in about 45-50 moves from the
>initial position.
>
>jm
1. Qg2 {[%emt 0:00:09]} Re2 {[%emt 0:00:13]} 2. Rd5+ {[%emt 0:00:03]} Rd2 {
[%emt 0:00:14]} 3. Rd8 {[%emt 0:00:02]} Qe3 {(h4) [%emt 0:00:21]} 4. Qf1+ {
[%emt 0:00:02]} Qe1 {[%emt 0:00:01]} 5. Qf3+ {[%emt 0:00:03]} Qe2 {
[%emt 0:00:02]} 6. Qh1+ {[%emt 0:00:02]} Qe1 {[%emt 0:00:09]} 7. Qxh5+ {
[%emt 0:00:03]} Qe2 {[%emt 0:00:01]} 8. Qh1+ {[%emt 0:00:02]} Qe1 {
[%emt 0:00:08]} 9. Qf3+ {[%emt 0:00:03]} Qe2 {[%emt 0:00:02]} 10. Qc6 {
[%emt 0:00:02]} Qe3 {[%emt 0:00:12]} 11. Qa4+ {[%emt 0:00:03]} Ke1 {
[%emt 0:00:07]} 12. Re8 {[%emt 0:00:02]} Qxe8 {[%emt 0:00:07]} 13. Qxe8+ {
[%emt 0:00:02]} Re2 {(Kf1) [%emt 0:00:16]} 14. Qf8 {[%emt 0:00:07]} Rf2 {
[%emt 0:00:09]} 15. Qh6 {[%emt 0:00:07]} Re2 {[%emt 0:00:15]} 16. Qh4+ {
(Kc1) [%emt 0:00:10]} Kf1 {[%emt 0:00:06]} 17. Kc1 {[%emt 0:00:19]} Kg2 {
[%emt 0:00:07]} 18. Qg4+ {(Kd1) [%emt 0:00:10]} Kf1 {(Kf2) [%emt 0:00:05]} 19.
Kd1 {[%emt 0:00:08]} Rf2 {[%emt 0:00:05]} 20. Qe4 {[%emt 0:00:08]} Kg1 {
[%emt 0:00:04]} 21. Ke1 {[%emt 0:00:04]} Rf1+ {[%emt 0:00:06]} 22. Kd2 {
[%emt 0:00:01]} Kh2 (22... Rf2+ {[%eval 497,12] [%emt 0:00:07]} 23. Ke3 {
[%eval 622,13] [%emt 0:00:16]} Rf1 {[%eval 706,11] [%emt 0:00:06]} 24. Qg4+ {
[%eval 994,12] [%emt 0:00:02]} Kh2 {[%eval 1034,11] [%emt 0:00:07]} 25. Qg5 {
[%eval 981,13] [%emt 0:00:04]} Kh3 {[%eval 1012,13] [%emt 0:00:04]} 26. Ke2 {
[%eval 1016,13] [%emt 0:00:03]} Ra1 {[%eval 1044,14] [%emt 0:00:11]} 27. Qh6+ {
[%eval 1019,12] [%emt 0:00:02]} Kg4 {[%eval 1047,13] [%emt 0:00:07]} 28. Qg7+ {
[%emt 0:00:09]} Kf5 {[%eval 1028,13] [%emt 0:00:00]} 29. Qxa1 {[%emt 0:00:02]}
Ke4 {[%eval 1037,12] [%emt 0:00:02]} 30. Qf6 {[%eval 32759,8] [%emt 0:00:03]}
Kd5 {[%eval 32761,9] [%emt 0:00:00]} 31. Kd3 {[%eval 32761,6] [%emt 0:00:00]}
Kc5 {[%eval 32762,7] [%emt 0:00:00]} 32. Qe6 {[%eval 32762,6] [%emt 0:00:00]}
Kb5 {[%eval 32763,6] [%emt 0:00:00]} 33. Qd6 {[%eval 32763,4] [%emt 0:00:00]}
Ka4 {[%eval 32764,4] [%emt 0:00:00]} 34. Kc4 {[%eval 32764,3] [%emt 0:00:00]}
Ka5 {[%eval 32765,4] [%emt 0:00:00]} 35. Qf6 {[%eval 32765,3] [%emt 0:00:00]}
Ka4 {[%emt 0:00:07]} 36. Qa6# {[%emt 0:00:00]}) 23. Ke2 {
[%eval 1016,11] [%emt 0:00:03]} Rg1 {[%emt 0:00:13]} 24. Kf2 {
[%eval 32761,11] [%emt 0:00:13]} Rg8 {[%emt 0:00:18]} 25. Qh7# {
[%eval 32766,2] [%emt 0:00:00]} 1-0
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.