Author: Ernst Walet
Date: 07:25:48 11/17/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 16, 1998 at 16:40:57, Ernst Walet wrote: >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? >> > >Aren't we talking about move 36 here? I ran this position on a K6-266 with >Tascbase 2.1 and after about 6 hours, completing ply 15, it still plays Qb6 with >a score of +1.31. > >Shall try to find out how it evaluates axb5. > >>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? >> >>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 > >Ernst-Jan After completing 14 ply's Tascbase evaluates Qb6 with +1.37 and axb5 with 0.75 Ernst-Jan
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.