Author: Angrim
Date: 15:24:07 08/05/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 2005 at 21:38:13, gerold daniels wrote: >On August 04, 2005 at 16:45:33, Angrim wrote: > >>So far, every argument that I have seen for the solvability OR insolvability >>of chess has been flawed, so it is unknown to me whether it is solvable >>in any practical amount of time. I am still casually working on solving >>a number of chess variants that look easier than chess to solve. >> >>Angrim > >What chess variants will you be solving. How mamy possible moves in this >variant. > >good luck on solving them :) > >Gerold. I'm working on suicide chess, atomic chess, and wild/5 with the rules for these variants that are used on the FICS. The number of possable moves is pretty similar to regular chess in these, the reason that they seem more solvable is that the open is generally more forcing, and white tends to have a larger advantage than in standard chess, both of which help reduce the practical difficulty. In suicide chess, I have refuted many of the opening moves, and most of the replies to 1. e3 have been proven to lose, but there are a few lines left that seem to give black a fighting chance. I have built all of the 5 piece endgames for this variant which helps a lot, but 6 piece egdb would help more, unfortunately they are significantly larger than the chess egdb and I don't have the computing resources of Hyatt and Nalimov. in atomic I'm a long ways from solving it. in wild/5 white seems to have a huge edge, but the search tree is exploding so badly with the addition of extra queens that progress is kinda slow. also I'm not working very hard on wild/5 since it is rarely played anymore. Angrim
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.