Author: Les Fernandez
Date: 18:01:41 10/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 2005 at 20:54:03, Marc Bourzutschky wrote: >On October 18, 2005 at 20:03:56, Les Fernandez wrote: > >>On October 18, 2005 at 12:37:17, Marc Bourzutschky wrote: >> >>>On October 18, 2005 at 11:12:03, GuyHaworth wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>I question your '736'. >>>> >>>>I have: >>>> >>>> 056 6-1 endgames >>>> 140 5-2 endgames >>>> 200 4-3 endgames >>>> --- >>>> 396 endgames >>>> >>>>... and therefore 792 endgames, if you also count the 3-4, 2-5 and 1-6 endgames. >>>> >>>>Have I gone wrong somewhere? >>>> >>>>g >>> >>>All entries in a 1-N database are trivially either "not-won" or "not-lost", so >>>there is no point in generating it. If you exclude the 56 1-6 endings from your >>>count you get Yakov's 736. >>> >>>-Marc >> >>Hi Marc, >> >>I agree that from the standpoint of playing chess there is no point in >>generating the 1-6 endings but from my perspective I have been doing a bunch of >>studies on all the end game sets that have been generated so far and it is very >>important for me to get the complete data sets. I have mentioned to Eugene in >>the past that I would only hope that when he is done with all the 6 piece EGTB's >>if he might consider that 1-5 set and the jury is still out. I am sure that >>those positions like 1-5 or 1-6 should solve pretty quickly and I would do them >>if I had the extra equipment to do so. >> >>Thanks, >> >>Les > >You missed the point here. The 1-5 and 1-6 databases contain information at >all. All the information is in the 5-1 and 6-1 databases. > >-Marc Oh ok gotcha! <S> THx Les
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.