Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:30:02 03/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 14, 1999 at 16:29:07, blass uri wrote: > >On March 14, 1999 at 15:52:27, Mark Rawlings wrote: > >>This is really an interesting position! Is the final consensus that it was a >>sound sacrifice? I let my programs search fairly deep with no real conclusion. >>After 1. .. Bh3 2. gxh3 Kf5 3. Kf2 Ke4 black still has a challenge forcing >>the win. I know some others must have been running this with faster computers, >>tablebases, etc. Any conclusions? >> >>Mark > >I think that it is a simple win for black. >I suggest you let your programs to play one against the other in slow time >control after 1...Bh3 2.gxh3 Kf5 3.Kf2 Ke4. > >I do not think that white has a chance. >4.Bxf6 is losing against 4...d4 and if white does not take f6 then black simply >puts the pawns at d3 and f3. > >Tablebases cannot help in this position because the lines that black is winning >are not based on tablebases(there are more than 5 pieces in the board) > >Uri > the last statement is wrong. IE the advantage for probing tablebases in the search is that the program gets to pick the path to 'enter' the tablebase. I can show you _lots_ of positions with 12 pieces on the board where Crafty has announced a mate in 60+ because it found a deep way to force entry into a won tablebase position. And it has happened with 16 pieces on the board also, once against a GM two years ago in a game/30 tournament on chess.net (Roman was the victim, mate in 28 was the announcement). I get thousands of tablebase hits from the position where black plays Bh3, so tablebases do influence this significantly. > >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.