Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 18:49:38 06/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 2004 at 20:42:45, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >On June 14, 2004 at 18:11:17, Derek Paquette wrote: > >>On June 14, 2004 at 15:38:12, Daniel Jackson wrote: >> >>>With todays top hardware/software, can the winning move e5!! be found? >>> >>>[D]r2qrb1k/1p1b2p1/p2ppn1p/8/3NP3/1BN5/PPP3QP/1K3RR1 w - - 0 1 >>> >>>Daniel >> >> >>I think that these position tests are absolutely useless, >>an IM can draw a program, so who cares if it can find 'specific' moves >> >>if it doesn't have a 'game plan' and can only draw, >> >>whats the difference? > >Actually I'm pretty happy with this result. This makes at least 5 of the 11 >nolot positions that Zappa can solve in reasonable (a few hours) time. Of >course, I am a long way from it playing the move over the board at tournament >time control! > >1. Nc3-e2 e6-e5 2. Nd4-f5 g7-g5 3. Bb3-f7 Bd7-e6 4. Bf7xe8 Qd8xe8 5. h2-h4 g5-g4 >6. Nf5xh6 Bf8xh6 7. Rf1xf6 Bh6-g7 8. Rf6-f1 Qe8-a4 9. Ne2-c3 > = (1.87) Depth: 17/38 00:58:56.78 2666999kN >1. e4-e5 d6xe5 2. Nc3-e4 Nf6-h5 3. Qg2-g6 Nh5-f4 4. Rf1xf4 e5xf4 5. Nd4-f3 >Qd8-b6 6. Rg1-g5 Qb6-d8 7. Nf3-e5 Qd8-e7 8. Ne5-f7 Kh8-g8 9. Ne4-f6 Qe7xf6 10. >Nf7xh6 Kg8-h8 11. Nh6-f7 Qf6xf7 12. Qg6xf7 > = (2.28) Depth: 17/34 01:16:27.50 3451482kN > >Positions like these show that (IMO) more depth is *always* better. Maybe not a >lot better, but Zappa is still finding new tactics at 17 ply. > >anthony The key to e4e5 is that the program must see Ne4 is good , leaving the Nd4 hanging by design -- just like Zappa shows. But even pv's can be misleading - after 7. ... Qe7 , the above position is Mate-in-7 with Rh5 [d]r3rb1k/1p1bq1p1/p3p1Qp/4N1R1/4Np2/1B6/PPP4P/1K6 w - - 0 6
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.