Author: blass uri
Date: 04:52:15 06/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 02, 1999 at 06:58:04, Bernhard Bauer wrote: >On June 02, 1999 at 05:00:17, Dan Newman wrote: > >>Well, I tried mine out on these at 1 min / position on a P6/200 >>and got the key move in 10 out of 16, but no mates. I then tried >>them at 1/2 hr each and still got 10/16 and no mates. Finally, I >>tried the first one for two hours -- still no mate... >> >>On the next to last (BWTC.0647) my program likes to force a >>repetition draw all the way through the 18 ply search -- no >>guarantee there isn't a mate though. >> > >This position is so simple and nice that you should have a look at it >and solve it yourselv. Not only your program fails, Crafty16.8 fails too. >I guess your program depends heavily on null move? >Oh, I'm missing the point again, sometimes I feel like a null-move-basher. >But as we all know such positions do *never* apear in practice, so why care? I do not believe that such positions never appear in practice. Junior has no problem to find the move but cannot find the mate because it does not use nalimov tablebases. I think that it is simple to find mate in X here. You only need to use the KQvs KPP tablebases and not to use the null move. 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.