Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 16:40:30 06/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 20, 2004 at 17:17:16, Vincent Lejeune wrote: >Shredder 8; amd 2800+; 384 MB hash > >Before 1.c6 > >1.Fh8 Rd3 2.Ff6 Rc2 3.Fd8 f3 4.Re3 Rc3 5.Fc7 Rb3 6.c6 Rxa3 7.Rd4 Fxc6 8.Rc5 f2 >9.Fe5 f1D 10.Fb2+ Rxb2 11.Rb6 a5 12.bxa5 Dg2 13.a6 Dxg5 > -+ (-1.67) Profondeur: 30/61 00:41:33 1239635kN, tb=207082 >1.Fh8 Rd3 2.Ff6 Rc2 3.Fd8 f3 4.Re3 Rc3 5.Fc7 Rb3 6.Fb6 Fb7 7.Rd2 > -+ (-1.67) Profondeur: 31/63 01:12:38 1998865kN, tb=562718 >1.Fd8 f3 2.Fc7 Rd3 3.Fd8 Re4 4.Fc7 Rd3 5.Fd8 Re4 6.Fc7 > -+ (-1.66) Profondeur: 31/66 01:50:50 2956003kN, tb=971377 >1.Fd8 f3 2.Fc7 Rd3 3.Fd8 Re4 4.Fc7 Rd3 5.Fd8 Re4 6.Fc7 > µ (-1.31) Profondeur: 31/66 02:25:07 4258268kN, tb=1071534 >1.Fd8 f3 2.Fc7 Rd3 3.Fd8 Re4 4.Fc7 Rd3 5.Fd8 Re4 6.Fc7 > µ (-1.31) Profondeur: 31/66 02:52:19 5724934kN, tb=1081999 >1.Fd8 f3 2.Fc7 Rd3 3.Fd8 Fb7 4.Fb6 Fc6 5.Fc7 Rc4 6.Re3 f2 7.Rxf2 Rd5 8.Re1 Fb7 > µ (-1.31) Profondeur: 32/60 03:27:19 6968786kN, tb=1189981 >1.Fd8 f3 2.Fc7 Fc6 3.Fd8 Rd4 4.Fc7 Rc3 5.Fa5 Fd5 6.c6 Fxc6 7.a4 Fe8 8.Rxf3 bxa4 >9.b5+ Rb3 10.bxa6 a3 11.Fd8 Fb5 12.a7 a2 13.a8D a1D 14.Dxa1 > µ (-1.32) Profondeur: 33/64 05:20:32 10005927kN, tb=2055899 >1.Fd8 f3 2.Fc7 Fc6 3.Fd8 Rd4 4.Fc7 Rc4 5.Re3 f2 6.Rxf2 Rd5 7.Re1 Fb7 > µ (-1.32) Profondeur: 34/65 08:12:45 13746137kN, tb=3993628 >1.Fd8 f3 2.Fc7 Fc6 3.Fd8 Rd4 4.Fc7 Rd3 5.Fa5 Rd4 6.Fc7 Rd3 7.Fa5 Rd4 8.Fc7 Rd3 > µ (-1.32) Profondeur: 35/68 12:17:43 18917445kN, tb=7035988 >1.Fd8 f3 2.Fc7 Fc6 3.Fd8 Rd4 4.Fc7 Rd3 5.Fa5 Rd4 6.Fc7 Rd3 7.Fa5 Rd4 8.Fc7 Rd3 > µ (-1.32) Profondeur: 36/70 19:31:30 27907138kN, tb=12689512 > >No new line after 31h. > >and after 1.c6, with filled hash table : > >8/8/p1P2Bp1/1p1b2P1/1P2kp2/P7/5K2/8 b - - 0 1 > >1...Fxc6 2.Rf1 Rd3 3.Fe5 f3 4.Fg3 Rc2 5.Fe1 Rb3 6.Rf2 Rxa3 7.Rg3 Rb3 8.Rf2 Fd5 >9.Rg3 Rc2 10.Fd2 > -+ (-2.01) Profondeur: 26/40 00:03:08 3553kN, tb=490 >1...Fxc6 2.Fd8 Rd3 3.Fb6 Rc3 4.Re2 f3+ 5.Rd1 Rb3 6.Fd8 > -+ (-2.05) Profondeur: 27/42 00:03:35 12018kN, tb=2059 >1...Fxc6 2.Fd8 f3 3.Fe7 Rd3 4.Fc5 Rc4 5.Fe3 a5 6.bxa5 Fb7 > -+ (-2.20) Profondeur: 28/54 00:04:28 35060kN, tb=8256 >1...Fxc6 2.Fd8 f3 3.Fe7 Rd3 4.Re1 Rc3 5.Fc5 Rb2 6.Rd2 Rxa3 7.Rc3 Ra4 8.Fb6 Fd7 >9.Fc5 a5 10.bxa5 Rxa5 11.Rb3 Fe6+ 12.Rc2 b4 13.Fd4 Ra4 14.Fg1 b3+ 15.Rc1 Rb5 > -+ (-2.33) Profondeur: 29/49 00:06:49 94849kN, tb=17901 >1...Fxc6 2.Fd8 f3 3.Fe7 Rd3 4.Re1 Rc3 5.Fc5 Rb2 6.Rd2 Rxa3 7.Rc3 Ra4 8.Fb6 Fd7 >9.Fd4 a5 10.bxa5 Rxa5 11.Rd2 Fc6 12.Fe5 Rb4 13.Re3 > -+ (-2.41) Profondeur: 30/53 00:10:35 176310kN, tb=38761 >1...Fxc6 2.Re1 Rd3 3.Fd8 f3 4.Fc7 Rc3 5.Fd6 Rb3 6.Rd1 Rxa3 7.Fc5 Ra4 8.Ff2 > -+ (-2.45) Profondeur: 31/54 00:25:47 481237kN, tb=158601 > > >On June 18, 2004 at 07:17:04, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>Dr John nunn created a Testset containing 10 endgame positions on the boarder >>between draw ans won for one side: >> >>http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/2640/pgn/tests/NET.zip >> >>The position Nr. 8 is this: >> >>[D]8/8/p4Bp1/1pPb2P1/1P2kp2/P7/5K2/8 w - - 0 1 >> >>Included is the following text: >> >>A fantastic position. An opposite-coloured bishop position with equal pawns >>looks as if it should be a draw, and indeed the players agreed to a draw at >>this point. However, White a serious problems because of his weak a3-pawn, >>which cannot be permanently defended by his bishop. Once this pawn has been >>captured, Black has the chance to make a second passed pawn by playing ...a5, >>which will stretch White's defence to the utmost. Dvoretsky and Yusupov >>subjected this ending to detailed analysis, and came to the astonishing >>conclusion that it is a draw, but only if White starts with the incredible 1 >>c6!!. It is hard to imagine that any machine would find such a move, but who >>knows what might happen in the future... >> >>Anyone analyzed this yet? >> >>some lines I can provide: >> >>Winning: >> >>1.Bf6-g7 Ke4-d3 2.Bg7-e5 f4-f3 3.Be5-g3 Bd5-c6 4.Kf2-f1 Kd3-c3 5.Bg3-e1+ Kc3-b2 >>6.Kf1-f2 Kb2xa3 7.Be1-d2 a6-a5 8.b4xa5 b5-b4 9.Kf2-e3 b4-b3 10.Bd2-c3 b3-b2 >>11.Bc3xb2+ Ka3xb2 12.Ke3-d2 Kb2-b3 13.Kd2-d3 Kb3-b4 14.a5-a6 Kb4xc5 15.a6-a7 >>Bc6-a8 16.Kd3-e3 Kc5-c4 >> >>Drawing (?): >> >>1.c6 Bxc6 2.Ke2 f3+ 3.Kd2 Kf4 4.Bd4 Kxg5 5.Ke3 Kf5 6.Bc5 g5 7.Bd6 g4 8.Bg3 Bd5 >>9.Kd4 Bb7 10.Ke3 Kf6 11.Kf4 Bc8 12.Bh4+ Kf7 13.Bf2 Ke7 14.Ke5 Kd8 15.Kd6 Bf5 >>16.Ke5 Bd7 17.Kd6 >> >>Thank you in advance for any analysis. >> >>regards Joachim thanks vincent for testing this with Shredder. This is equal or even harder than the Nolot-Positions and I bet no computer will solve this within 24 hours in the next 10 years. Anyone who wants to bet? regards Joachim
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.