Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Two WAC positions

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 09:41:51 10/21/03

Go up one level in this thread


On October 21, 2003 at 12:34:20, Uri Blass wrote:

>On October 21, 2003 at 12:28:33, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On October 21, 2003 at 11:53:02, Tord Romstad wrote:
>>
>>>I don't run my engine through WAC very often, but before releasing a new
>>>version (which I will do within a couple of days) I run the whole suite as
>>>a sanity test.  This time, the following position made me worried:
>>>
>>>[D]8/8/2Kp4/3P1B2/2P2k2/5p2/8/8 w - - bm Bc8; id "WAC146";
>>>
>>>Previously, my program had no problems with this position.  The new
>>>version, which is the first one to include tablebase support, prefers
>>>Bd3 instead of Bc8.  At ply 21, the score is +12 for white.  When I
>>>disable tablebases, the program plays Bc8.
>>>
>>>Does Bd3 also win, or should I look for yet another bug?
>>
>>Bd3 is also winning and is one of the solutions
>>
>>8/8/2Kp4/3P1B2/2P2k2/5p2/8/8 w - - bm Bc8 Bd3 Bh3; id "WAC.146";
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>One of the hardest positions in WAC for my engine is number 163:
>>>
>>>[D]5rk1/2p4p/2p4r/3P4/4p1b1/1Q2NqPp/PP3P1K/R4R2 b - - bm Qg2+; id "WAC163";
>>>
>>>On a Pentium IV 2.4 GHz, I need 11 plies and 1m53s to find the winning move.
>>
>>Congratulations
>>Your program is better than Shredder7.04 that cannot find it even after 13 plies
>>
>>Analysis on A1000
>>New game
>>[D]5rk1/2p4p/2p4r/3P4/4p1b1/1Q2NqPp/PP3P1K/R4R2 b - - 0 1
>>
>>Analysis by Shredder 7.04:
>>
>>1...cxd5 2.Nxg4 Qxg4 3.Qxd5+ Kh8
>>  ³  (-0.26)   Depth: 1/5   00:00:00
>>1...cxd5 2.Nxg4 Qxg4 3.Qxd5+ Kh8
>>  ³  (-0.26)   Depth: 2/5   00:00:00
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Kh8 3.Qe5+ Rff6 4.Qxc7
>>  =  (0.04)   Depth: 3/8   00:00:00
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qe5
>>  =  (0.12)   Depth: 3/10   00:00:00
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qe5 c6
>>  =  (0.07)   Depth: 4/10   00:00:00
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Rf4 4.gxf4 Qxf2+ 5.Rxf2
>>  ²  (0.32)   Depth: 5/17   00:00:00
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Rb8 4.Qxf3 exf3 5.Rfb1
>>  ²  (0.45)   Depth: 5/17   00:00:00
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qxd1 4.Nxd1 Bd5
>>  ²  (0.48)   Depth: 6/18   00:00:00  37kN
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qf6 4.a4 Qxb2 5.Ng4 Rg6
>>  ²  (0.51)   Depth: 7/18   00:00:01  111kN
>>1...Rd6 2.Rad1 Kh8 3.dxc6 Rxd1 4.Qg8+ Kxg8
>>  ²  (0.50)   Depth: 7/18   00:00:01  145kN
>>1...Rd6 2.Rad1 Kh8 3.Qc4 Bd7 4.Qc3+ Rff6 5.a3 cxd5 6.Nxd5
>>  ²  (0.47)   Depth: 7/18   00:00:01  161kN
>>1...Rd6 2.Rad1 Kh8 3.Qb7 Rxd5 4.Nxd5 cxd5 5.Rg1
>>  ²  (0.48)   Depth: 8/23   00:00:02  322kN
>>1...Rd6 2.Rad1 Kh8 3.a4 cxd5 4.Rxd5 Qe2 5.Qc3+ Kg8 6.Rg5+ Rg6 7.Qb3+ Kh8
>>  ²  (0.60)   Depth: 9/23   00:00:04  664kN
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qf6 4.Qc2 Rg6 5.a4 Qe5 6.Qc3 Qxc3
>>  ²  (0.59)   Depth: 9/26   00:00:05  747kN
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qf6 4.Qc2 Rb8 5.b3 Qe5 6.Rad1 Rg6
>>  ²  (0.46)   Depth: 9/26   00:00:06  918kN
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qxd1 4.Nxd1 Rhf6 5.Re1 Bg4 6.a4 Bxd1 7.Raxd1 Rxf2+
>>8.Kxh3 Re8
>>  ²  (0.35)   Depth: 10/28   00:00:10  1523kN
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Rhf6 4.Rc1 Bxa2 5.Rxc7 Qxd1 6.Nxd1 Bb3 7.Kxh3 Bxd1
>>8.Rxd1 Rxf2
>>  =  (0.17)   Depth: 11/32   00:00:20  3257kN
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Rhf6 4.a4 Qxd1 5.Nxd1 e3 6.Nxe3 Rxf2+ 7.Rxf2 Rxf2+
>>8.Kg1 Rxb2
>>  ²  (0.29)   Depth: 12/37   00:00:38  6038kN
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Rhf6 4.a4 Qxd1 5.Nxd1 e3 6.Kg1 Bc4 7.Nxe3
>>  =  (0.04)   Depth: 13/37   00:01:26  13252kN
>>1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qb5 Bc8 4.Qd5+ Qf7 5.Qxf7+ Rxf7 6.Kh1 Ba6 7.Ng4 Kg7
>>8.Nxh6
>>  =  (0.03)   Depth: 13/38   00:03:27  32739kN
>>
>>(Blass, Tel-Aviv 21.10.2003)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>The problem is to find the line 1... Qg2+ 2. Nxg2 hxg2+ 3. Kxg2 Bf3+ 4. Qxf3
>>>exf3+ 5. Kg1 Rf5! followed by Rfh5.  Without nullmove pruning, this position
>>>is solved within a few seconds.
>>>
>>>This is rather annoying, as I have lost more games than I would like on
>>>the ICC because of missing similar tactics.  Are there any inexpensive
>>>tricks to help me solve this kind of positions more quickly?
>>>
>>>Tord
>>
>>Yes
>>
>>Movei has no problem to solve it after 7 plies because it can see a threat
>>thanks to smaller king safety evaluation(it does not see a mate threat but the
>>threat that it see is enough not to prune).
>>
>>Uri
>
>I can add that shredder finally finds the solution after 14 plies.
>
>New game
>5rk1/2p4p/2p4r/3P4/4p1b1/1Q2NqPp/PP3P1K/R4R2 b - - 0 1
>
>Analysis by Shredder 7.04:
>
>   =  (0.00)   Depth: 14/41   00:09:27  88548kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kg1 gxf1Q+ 4.Rxf1 Bf3 5.d6+ Kg7 6.Qc3+ Rff6 7.Qb3
>  =  (-0.01)   Depth: 14/41   00:10:51  102352kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kg1 gxf1Q+ 4.Rxf1 Bf3 5.d6+ Kg7 6.Qc3+ Rff6 7.Qb3 cxd6
>8.Qxf3 exf3
>  ³  (-0.36)   Depth: 14/41   00:10:54  102800kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5 7.Re8+ Kf7
>8.Re7+ Kxe7 9.Re1+ Kf6 10.Ra1 Rh1#
>  -+  (-#11)   Depth: 14/41   00:11:35  110687kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5 7.Re8+ Kf7
>8.Re7+ Kxe7 9.Re1+ Kf6 10.Ra1 Rh1#
>  -+  (-#11)   Depth: 15/41   00:11:36  110692kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5 7.Re8+ Kf7
>8.Re7+ Kxe7 9.Re1+ Kf6 10.Ra1 Rh1#
>  -+  (-#11)   Depth: 16/41   00:11:37  110702kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5 7.Re8+ Kf7
>8.Re7+ Kxe7 9.Re1+ Kf6 10.Ra1 Rh1#
>  -+  (-#11)   Depth: 17/41   00:11:38  110731kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5 7.Re8+ Kf7
>8.Re7+ Kxe7 9.Re1+ Kf6 10.Ra1 Rh1#
>  -+  (-#11)   Depth: 18/41   00:11:39  110860kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5 7.Re8+ Kf7
>8.Re7+ Kxe7 9.Re1+ Kf6 10.Ra1 Rh1#
>  -+  (-#11)   Depth: 19/41   00:11:40  111014kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5 7.Re8+ Kf7
>8.Re7+ Kxe7 9.Re1+ Kf6 10.Ra1 Rh1#
>  -+  (-#11)   Depth: 20/41   00:11:41  111227kN
>1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5 7.Re8+ Kf7
>8.Re7+ Kxe7 9.Re1+ Kf6 10.Ra1 Rh1#
>  -+  (-#11)   Depth: 21/41   00:11:44  111626kN
>
>(Blass, Tel-Aviv 21.10.2003)
>
>Uri

You are also better than Fritz8.0.0.8 that needs 13 plies

New game
5rk1/2p4p/2p4r/3P4/4p1b1/1Q2NqPp/PP3P1K/R4R2 b - - 0 1

Analysis by Fritz 8:

1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qf7 4.Ng4 Bxg4 5.Qxg4+ Qg6 6.Qxg6+ hxg6 7.a4
  ³  (-0.38)   Depth: 7/23   00:00:00  155kN
1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qf7 4.Ng4 Bxg4 5.Qxg4+ Qg6 6.Qd7 c6 7.a4
  ³  (-0.41)   Depth: 8/28   00:00:00  367kN
1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qf7 4.Ng4 Bxg4 5.Qxg4+ Qg6 6.Qxg6+ hxg6 7.Rae1 Rb8
8.b3
  ³  (-0.38)   Depth: 9/27   00:00:02  672kN
1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd1 Qf7 4.Ng4 Bxg4 5.Qxg4+ Qg6 6.Qxg6+ hxg6 7.Rae1 Rb8
8.b3 Re8
  ³  (-0.34)   Depth: 10/33   00:00:07  2540kN
1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd4 Rhf6 4.Rac1 Bxa2 5.Rxc7 Be6 6.b4 Rb8 7.Qc5 h6
  ³  (-0.56)   Depth: 11/42   00:00:24  9556kN
1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd4 Rhf6 4.Rac1 Bxa2 5.Rxc7 Bb3 6.Rb7 Qe2 7.Kh1 Bc2 8.b4
  ³  (-0.47)   Depth: 12/36   00:00:47  19380kN
1...cxd5 2.Qxd5+ Be6 3.Qd4 Rhf6 4.Rac1 Bxa2 5.Rxc7 Bb3 6.Re7 Qe2 7.Kh1 Qd3
8.Rxe4
  ³  (-0.44)   Depth: 13/42   00:01:46  45145kN
1...Qg2+!
  ³  (-0.47)   Depth: 13/42   00:02:17  58859kN
1...Qg2+!
  ³  (-0.63)   Depth: 13/42   00:02:17  58935kN
1...Qg2+!
  µ  (-0.94)   Depth: 13/42   00:02:18  59020kN
1...Qg2+!
  -+  (-1.56)   Depth: 13/42   00:02:18  59277kN
1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rae1 Rfh5
  -+  (-8.13)   Depth: 13/42   00:02:21  60647kN
1...Qg2+!
  -+  (-8.41)   Depth: 14/30   00:02:23  61529kN
1...Qg2+!
  -+  (-8.69)   Depth: 14/30   00:02:24  61861kN
1...Qg2+!
  -+  (-9.25)   Depth: 14/30   00:02:25  62256kN
1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5
  -+  (-#12)   Depth: 14/40   00:02:29  63884kN
1...Qg2+ 2.Nxg2 hxg2+ 3.Kxg2 Bf3+ 4.Qxf3 exf3+ 5.Kg1 Rf5 6.Rfe1 Rfh5
  -+  (-#12)   Depth: 14/40   00:02:35  66551kN

(Blass, Tel-Aviv 21.10.2003)




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.