Author: blass uri
Date: 18:54:51 03/10/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 10, 1999 at 21:16:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 10, 1999 at 02:33:14, Peter Kappler wrote: > >> >>8/8/4kpp1/3p1b2/p6P/2B5/6P1/6K1 b - - bm Bh3; id "Topalov-Shirov Linares 98"; >> >> >>Does everybody remember this game? It's from last year's Linares tournament, >>where Shirov played a shocking bishop sacrifice in the endgame and won >>brilliantly. I believe that post-mortem analysis proved it was the only way to >>win. (Please correct me if this is wrong) >> >>I watched this game live on ICC with dozens of others, and we were all quite >>impressed with Shirov's powers of calculation. >> >>This *should* be an extremely difficult problem for computers - but I'm sure >>somebody will tell me that Hiarcs or some other commercial program can solve it >>in 10 seconds. >> >>Just curious... >> >>--Peter > > >I ran this two ways.. First from the original position to see what crafty would >play with no 'urging' by me: > > 12-> 6.37 2.61 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. g4 Bd1 4. h5 > gxh5 5. gxh5 Bxh5 6. Ke3 a2 7. Kd4 > Bd1 8. Ba1 f5 > 13 11.78 2.62 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. g4 Bd1 4. h5 > gxh5 5. gxh5 Bxh5 6. Ke3 a2 7. Bb2 > Bg6 8. Kd4 Be4 9. Ba1 > 13-> 13.87 2.62 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. g4 Bd1 4. h5 > gxh5 5. gxh5 Bxh5 6. Ke3 a2 7. Bb2 > Bg6 8. Kd4 Be4 9. Ba1 > 14 34.53 2.46 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. Ba1 Kf5 4. > Ke3 Be4 5. g3 a2 6. Kf2 Bc2 > 14-> 45.46 2.46 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. Ba1 Kf5 4. > Ke3 Be4 5. g3 a2 6. Kf2 Bc2 > 15 1:08 2.46 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. Ba1 Kf5 4. > Ke3 Be4 5. g3 a2 6. Kf2 Bc2 > 15-> 1:24 2.46 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. Ba1 Kf5 4. > Ke3 Be4 5. g3 a2 6. Kf2 Bc2 > 16 2:55 2.37 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. Ke3 a2 4. g3 > Kf5 5. Kd4 Be4 6. Kc5 Kg4 7. Bxf6 Kxg3 > 8. Kd6 Kg4 > 16-> 3:59 2.37 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 Bc2 3. Ke3 a2 4. g3 > Kf5 5. Kd4 Be4 6. Kc5 Kg4 7. Bxf6 Kxg3 > 8. Kd6 Kg4 > 17 8:25 2.42 1. ... a3 2. Kf2 a2 3. Ke2 Be4 4. Kf2 > Kf5 5. g3 Bb1 6. Ke3 Bc2 7. Kd4 Be4 > 8. Kc5 Kg4 9. Bxf6 > > >so it likes a3 thru any depth it might get in a real tournament setting. > > >I then played Bh3 and let it search for white: > > 16-> 49.18 0.56 2. gxh3 Kf5 3. Kf2 Kf4 4. Bxf6 a3 5. > Bc3 Ke4 6. Ba1 Kf4 7. Bh8 > 17 1:14 0.68 2. gxh3 Kf5 3. Kf2 Kf4 4. Bxf6 a3 5. > Bc3 Ke4 6. Ke2 Kf4 7. Kd3 Kg3 8. Bf6 > a2 9. Kc2 Kf4 10. Kb3 Kf5 > 17-> 1:22 0.68 2. gxh3 Kf5 3. Kf2 Kf4 4. Bxf6 a3 5. > Bc3 Ke4 6. Ke2 Kf4 7. Kd3 Kg3 8. Bf6 > a2 9. Kc2 Kf4 10. Kb3 Kf5 > 18 1:56 -- 2. gxh3 > 18 2:39 0.00 2. gxh3 Kf5 3. Kf2 Ke4 4. Bxf6 a3 5. > h5 gxh5 6. Ba1 d4 7. Ke2 h4 8. Kd2 > Kf4 9. Bxd4 Kg3 10. Bc3 Kxh3 > 18-> 3:26 0.00 2. gxh3 Kf5 3. Kf2 Ke4 4. Bxf6 a3 5. > h5 gxh5 6. Ba1 d4 7. Ke2 h4 8. Kd2 > Kf4 9. Bxd4 Kg3 10. Bc3 Kxh3 > 19 4:37 0.00 2. gxh3 Kf5 3. Kf2 Ke4 4. Bxf6 a3 5. > h5 gxh5 6. Ba1 d4 7. Ke2 h4 8. Kd2 > Kf4 9. Bxd4 Kg3 10. Bc3 Kxh3 > 19-> 5:24 0.00 2. gxh3 Kf5 3. Kf2 Ke4 4. Bxf6 a3 5. > h5 gxh5 6. Ba1 d4 7. Ke2 h4 8. Kd2 > Kf4 9. Bxd4 Kg3 10. Bc3 Kxh3 > >which is right interesting, because notice this runs into the 5 piece >tablebases and says _draw_. > >question is, now, does Bh3 really make sense? This seems to say "no". > >interesting... Did you let crafty to play against itself. after 2.gxh3 Kf5 3.Kf2 Ke4 4.Bxf6 crafty16.5 as an engine for Junior5(no tablebases) prefers 4...d4 with evaluation -6.01 at depth 18 and -6.02 at depth 19 I believe that crafty needs more time to see the win after Bh3. I do not remember the game but I remember that I analyzed it with a computer and did not see a draw for white. 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.