Author: Mark Rawlings
Date: 15:43:59 02/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 01, 2005 at 11:24:12, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On January 31, 2005 at 19:49:20, Mark Rawlings wrote: > >Mark, > >you are non stop talking about 6 men, however the position shown is a 7 man. > >a SEVEN man. > >it's not very fair to compare DTM of a 6 man with a 7 man. > >Compare with other 7 men i'd say and you might end up in a longer mate. > I agree completely. I'm sure there will be a number of amazingly long 7-man tablebase mates. I probably should have changed the subject line in my original post... Mark >>On January 31, 2005 at 17:34:52, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On January 30, 2005 at 12:53:11, Helmut Conrady wrote: >>> >>>>On January 30, 2005 at 10:56:55, Mark Rawlings wrote: >>>> >>>>>Very interesting! >>>>> >>>>>Is the KRNKNN mate in 262 still the longest tablebase mate?? >>> >>>Possibly not. If you simply have some 100 move sequence that exchanges to other >>>5 or 6 men, you already are having a far longer mate. >> >>There are longer mates, of course, but they haven't been constructed in >>tablebases yet. Also, the DTM in the existing 6-piece tablebases already take >>into account the number of moves after conversion to the 5-piece tablebases, >>etc. >> >>I remember seeing one of these long tablebase mates where someone added a piece >>or two with some forcing moves to create an even longer mate. This would be >>pretty tough to do for more than a few moves, though! >> >>Mark >> >> >>> >>>I don't think we will have exact statistics on it though. DTM won't hold for >>>long. It eats too much harddisk space for 7 men when compared to win/draw/loss. >>> >>>Vincent >>> >>>>>Mark >>>> >>>>Yes these 523 plies are the longest DTM so far. I expect this record holds in >>>>the 6 piece endings. >>> >>>KNNNNKQ is a 7 man egtb. >>> >>>>Helmut
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.