Author: stuart taylor
Date: 08:53:20 01/02/06
In which it clearly seems analytically provable that Spaasky's play was faultless, yet extremely hard to see as being so, and is also very deep and unclear....except after great and deep analysis. But as usual, I'm not organised enough to post the position again, although I did atleast once before. Questions are 1)How long does it take for Rybka to find .....rh1? 2)And how long does it take to find .....h4? 3)BUT, DOES it ever find the move before, which is .....h5? 4)Then, finally, DOES it ever find (before that)......Ng4? I'm sorry I didn't put up the moves again, but anyone who is familiar with it will readily find the position I'm refering to. CY maybe you can ask Jack to put it up! For questions 3 and 4, I wouldn't consider it extreme to give Rybka 5 hours each. But even if it finds answer to q.2 with answer tro q.1 in its analysis, within only a few minutes, that would also be very good. S.Taylor
This page took 0.01 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.