Author: Mark Young
Date: 12:57:23 07/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 1999 at 14:57:07, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >On July 24, 1999 at 14:36:52, Mark Young wrote: > >>On July 24, 1999 at 14:07:44, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >> >>> >>>On July 24, 1999 at 06:56:50, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>> >>>>On July 24, 1999 at 06:36:46, blass uri wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>On July 24, 1999 at 06:21:39, blass uri wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I gave my hiarcs7.32 64 Mb hash tables and some hours on my pentium200 and at >>>>>>depth 11/30 it wants to play >>>>>>Rb1 instead of a4. >>>>>> >>>>>>I did not look at the screen so I do not know when Hiarcs changed its mind >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>>Now it wants to play Rf1 at the same depth with evaluation 0.31 after more than >>>>>3 hours >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>Maybe Mel has a PIII-2000, so it happened much faster for him than for Mark and >>>>Terry. ;) >>> >>>Hello Dave, >>> >>>No, actually I have an AMD K8 4000. :) >>> >>>What has been completely ignored here is in the same game at move 20 Hiarcs >>>played Qd which is I believe a bad move. You can check out the move sequence in >>>my original post entitled: To Mark Young. >> >>So you are retracting the claim on the first two >_________________ > >No, I am not retracting anything! I reported exactly what occurred. >_______________________________ > >positions? If so, I will start >>looking at the third position. I have only had the positions for a day or so and >>it take time to do analysis. If Hiarcs 7.32 made a bad move in the 3rd position >>I will agree with you and say so for that position, but before I even look and >>waste my time in this so called discussion. You need to answer the findings of >>the first two positions and show us a line that refutes Hiarcs 7.32 moves if you >>still disagree. >____________________________ > >You keep asking me to show you a line that refutes a4. I have told you that it >was Hiarcs itself that refuted a4 when it refused to replay the move and >insisted on Rf1. If you cannot accept that there is nothing further I can say. >______________________________> >>As it stands now you have been wrong 2 out of 2 times. Now __________________ > >I have not been wrong 2 out of 2 times. Your comment about the passed pawns is >without merit for Black cannot hold both pawns after Nc5. In fact, after Nc5 the >line continues and Hiarcs, Fritz and Rebel all have White with a clear >advantage. Period. >________________________________________________ > >you want to go to the >>thrid position, if you are wrong there is will there be a 4th 5th and 6th etc. >>until you luck out and find one positions were hiarcs 7.32 blunderd? I know >>Hiarcs 7.32 blunders, but the point of your post was these postions we going to >>show us that Hiarcs 7.32 was not such a good program. The first two positions it >>seems Hiarcs 7.32 played correctly, now you only have 1 postion left to support >>your claim and opinion. If you are correct on just this one positions does this >>somehow support your claim and opinion when you are wrong on the other two. I >>don't think so. >__________________ > >I do not feel mistaken on any of the three claims I made. Hiarcs refuted a4 when >it chose to only play Rf1 instead. I didn't force Hiarcs to change from a4, I >simply let it replay the move for the reason I have told you numerous times. >This is enough for me on this issue as I have many other things to do instead of >beating a dead horse. >______________________________________> You are the one claiming things, without anything to back them up. You must explain why even after 3 hours of search Hiarcs 7.32 still plays a4 on my system. My Hiarcs 7.32 did not refute it own move:) New position rnbk3r/pp4bp/1qp2pP1/3p3B/4p2N/2P5/PPP3PP/R1BQK2R w KQ - 0 1 Analysis by Hiarcs 7.32: 12.Rf1 hxg6 13.Nxg6 ² (0.45) depth: 1 00:00:00 12.Rf1 hxg6 13.Nxg6 ² (0.45) depth: 2/5 00:00:00 12.Rf1 hxg6 13.Nxg6 ² (0.45) depth: 3/9 00:00:00 12.Rf1 Be6 = (0.20) depth: 4/10 00:00:00 12.Rf1 Be6 13.Qe2 hxg6 14.Nxg6 = (0.01) depth: 4/10 00:00:00 12.g3 Bd7 13.Qd4 hxg6 14.Bxg6 = (0.14) depth: 4/10 00:00:00 12.g3 Bd7 13.Qe2 c5 14.Bg4 = (0.01) depth: 5/17 00:00:00 8kN 12.Rb1 Be6 13.Bf4 hxg6 14.Nxg6 ² (0.28) depth: 5/17 00:00:01 42kN 12.Rb1 Qa5 13.Bf4 Qxa2 14.0-0 Na6 = (0.23) depth: 6/21 00:00:02 69kN 12.Rb1 hxg6 13.Nxg6 Rh7 14.Bf4 Be6 15.Qe2 c5 ² (0.41) depth: 7/23 00:00:06 211kN 12.Rb1 Nd7 = (0.16) depth: 8/25 00:00:14 477kN 12.Rb1 Nd7 13.Bf4 Ne5 14.gxh7 Rxh7 = (0.08) depth: 8/27 00:00:17 595kN 12.a4 a5 13.Ra3 hxg6 ² (0.31) depth: 8/27 00:01:13 2397kN 12.a4 Nd7 13.a5 Qc5 14.Qe2 Ne5 15.Be3 Qd6 16.gxh7 Nc4 17.Ng6 Rxh7 ² (0.26) depth: 9/27 00:01:56 3805kN 12.a4 hxg6 13.Nxg6 Rh7 14.a5 Qc5 15.Bf4 Na6 16.Rf1 Qb5 17.b3 Qc5 18.c4 Qb4+ 19.Kf2 ² (0.35) depth: 10/29 00:05:40 10900kN 12.a4 Nd7 = (0.10) depth: 11/30 00:11:01 21447kN 12.a4 Nd7 13.a5 Qc5 14.Nf5 Ne5 15.Nxg7 hxg6 16.a6 = (0.09) depth: 11/30 00:13:13 25871kN 12.a4 Nd7 13.a5 Qc5 14.Nf5 Ne5 15.Nxg7 hxg6 16.Be2 Rh7 17.Qd4 Qd6 18.Bf4 Rxg7 19.0-0 = (0.18) depth: 12/30 02:07:35 229783kN (Young, 7/24/99) >>> >>>Regards, >>>Mel >>>> >>>>Dave
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.