Author: Mark Young
Date: 12:34:04 11/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 16, 1998 at 14:50:57, Bruce Moreland wrote: >r1r1q1k1/6p1/p2b1p1p/1p1PpP2/PPp5/2P4P/R1B2QP1/R5K1 w - - 0 1 > >It has been contended that this move would be difficult for a computer to find, >and this has caused some doubts to be raised as to whether the computer found it >without assistance in this game. > >I would like to ask how we can clear this up absent input from DB. > >Has anybody run this for a long period on a micro, and if so, was any move >selected other than 35. Qb6? > >Is the counter-attacking line 35. Qb6 Qe7 36. axb5 Rab8 37. Qxa6 e4 supposedly >the reason that white shouldn't play 35. Qb6? Or is it some other line? If it >is too hard or impossible to find 35. axb5, would finding this line show >anything? I don't understand why if axb5 is the best move, why people would think that deepblue could not find it. The dame thing searches 250 million positions a second. Do people really think that only a human could find this move if it is the best. (sorry if this is a dumb statement, I don't know the full story behind the move axb5 played by DB) I will let Rebel 10 crank on this position and see what it finds. So far it likes Qf2-b6 , but axb5 is it second choice. So lets see what happens. A quick check showed nice plus scored for both moves, over +.60 for axb5 , and a bit over +1.00 for Qf2-b6 > >Is there some minimum score delta we can achieve between the position after 35. >axb5 and 35. Qb6 that might be evidence that DB should be given the benefit of >the doubt? > >Are these questions unfair or wrong, if so, are their other questions that can >be asked and possibly answered that will help clear this up? > >bruce
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.