Author: Arturo Ochoa
Date: 19:27:42 07/09/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 09, 2005 at 17:47:33, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On July 09, 2005 at 15:57:27, William Sorin wrote: > >>I hate it when these damn programmers feel sorry for the human and give them the >>draw in a dead lost position for the human. I can count a handful of games where >>this has been done allegedly out of "respect" for the human. Is not chess >>suppose to be a game of truth? > >[D]8/4nk1p/p1r3p1/1p1p4/3K2P1/1P2N2P/P7/4R3 w - - 0 40 > >During the game, I gave the continuation 40.Nxd5 Nxd5 41.Kxd5 Rc2 42.a4! =. The >42.a4! move was misevaluated by fruit 2.1 which I was using to analyze, but I >nevertheless understood the position to be drawn. Later Anthony Cozzie gave >Zappa's analysis with the correct evaluation of 0.0 that included the 42.a4! >move. Very impressive for an engine. > >It might be argued that the draw agreement was a little early, but surely >Ehlvest understood the Rook ending at least as well as I did. A matter of >technique as they say. I don't claim to have the greatest technique in the >world, but I do understand--that--position. This the kind of post that I enjoy a lot. Thank you. Kind regards, Arturo.
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.