Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 01:45:07 08/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 1999 at 04:32:27, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On August 02, 1999 at 22:47:14, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > > >>Your post is a little ambiguous. Are you saying Nalimov EGTB is a shortest mate >>EGTB for all the 5 man endings? How would the tables be generated? >> >>I would be surprised if all the endings covered by the Nalimov EGTB are of the >>shortest mate variety. I would also be disappointed for the reason indicated. >>Some endings (other than KQKR which a computer program can win in about 34 >>moves) would be "impossible" to win using such a TB due to the 50 move rule. > >I would be suprised if the Nalimov tables are *not* distance to mate. The only >publicly available distance to conversion tables that I know of are the Thompson >tables. Shortest mate EGTB also has the defect of possibly concluding that an ending is drawn due to the 50 move when it is actually winning. By the way, I think this issue can be cleared up by noting that "distance to mate" is not necessarily the same as "shortest mate". > >And yes, the tables do suffer from the possible problem that you mentioned, >although this should be extremely rare in practice. > >bruce
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.