Author: Uri Blass
Date: 17:31:03 06/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 2004 at 19:40:30, Joachim Rang wrote: >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 I did not try it but I am almost sure that it is possible to change personality of programs to find c6. If you bet about the next 10 years then programmers may decide to concentrate in teaching their program to solve this problem and not playing chess and I suspect that some program is going to solve it. Uri
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.