Author: Peter Berger
Date: 13:34:33 02/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 11, 2004 at 13:09:44, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 11, 2004 at 12:50:40, Peter Berger wrote: > >>On February 11, 2004 at 10:10:16, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On February 11, 2004 at 09:20:09, Peter Berger wrote: >>> >>>>Cute and surprising result for Bringer - I don't think I ever saw this one >>>>solved before. >>> >>>I did not investigate the position but >>>one of the questions to answer is if the move is winning and only winning move. >>> >>>Some tree by yace that proves a big score for white after Ng5(at least +2.xx >>>pawns) if you can generate it may be convincing that Ng5 is probably winning. >>> >>>Uri >> >>*You* did not investigate the position - but *I* should generate a tree with >>yace to convince you that the solution is correct ?! Something is very wrong >>with this logic IMHO. >> >>Peter > >The point is that I did not claim something about the position and I did not >claim that the solution is correct or wrong. > >Hsu suggested a different move(Bg5) after a lot of analysis. > >Saying:"I don't think I ever saw this one solved before." means that there is a >solution so I responded to make clear that we have no proof that there is a >justified solution. > >Uri This is a testsuite, there are solutions to be found, they were found in this case, nowhere did I claim anything else that I would have to prove - if you have good reasons to doubt the solution, although you admitted that you didn't even look at the position closely, this could be discussed - but it would be a different topic.
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.