Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:10:07 10/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 08, 2003 at 17:01:00, Dann Corbit wrote:
>On October 08, 2003 at 16:25:30, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On October 08, 2003 at 15:53:12, Slater Wold wrote:
>>
>>>On October 08, 2003 at 15:13:03, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 07, 2003 at 18:48:30, Slater Wold wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>r2br1k1/1b1n2p1/p2pp1Pp/qp6/3BPP2/P1N5/1PPQ4/1K1R1B1R w - -
>>>>>
>>>>>This game can be over in ~10 moves.
>>>>>
>>>>>Can you find Bxg7?
>>>>
>>>>Dann already posted another experiment with Yace. I had it run over night, too.
>>>>Just in the initial position. Not fast, but here is what I got:
>>>>
>>>> 926327176 7:59:22 2.75 15. 1.Bxg7 Kxg7 2.Bxb5 axb5 3.Rxh6 Nf6 4.Qh2 Rg8
>>>> 5.Rh7+ Kf8 6.Rxb7 Rxg6 7.f5 Qa6 8.fxg6 Qxb7
>>>> 9.Qh8+ Ng8 10.Rf1+ {HT} {-190}
>>>
>>>Just an interesting comparison between you and Dann. He found:
>>>
>>>1. Bxd7 Kxg7 2. Bxb5 axb5 3. Rxh6 Nf6 4. Qh2 Rg8 5. Rh7+ Kf8 6. Rf7+ Ke8 7. e5
>>>dxe5 8. fxe5 Rxg6 9. exf6 with a score of +7.96.
>>
>>It seems that dieter did not prove that score and the score is the score of the
>>final position after a game of yace against itself.
>>
>>It is possible that if you try to prove it you get better moves for black.
>>
>>After 7...dxe5 I get even more than +9 for white but black has alternatives
>>like 7...Rxg6 +5.98/11 for white and the score may fail low later but I guess
>>that there are alternatives in earlier moves.
>
>I think that it is never more than an educated guess unless you can formally
>prove a checkmate with a mate solver.
Yes but there is a difference between +7.96 that was proved by backward analysis
and +7.96 that was proved by backward analysis and in general I can trust more
the second one(in this case I am sure in more than 99.9% that white is winning
but the reason is not only seeing the score).
Uri
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.