Author: José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba
Date: 14:44:33 08/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 1999 at 15:33:10, Ricardo Gibert wrote: [big snip] > >You "don't get it", because you have overlooked the word "adjourned". > >I will give a more specific example: HUMAN plays an ending where he ADJOURNS. He >must mate OR make pawn move that preserves win OR capture that preserves win >within say 6 moves to avoid the 50 move rule. In his ADJOURNMENT ANALYSIS, if he >uses a SHORTEST MATE database, he may wrongly conclude he can't do it. > >1. Instead of > distance to: mate > >2. Better is single number representing > distance to: mate OR win preseving capture OR win preserving pawn move > (whichever comes soonest) > >The 2nd way you ALWAYS win a winnable position. I find it hard to believe >Nalimov did his EGTB the way you assert (The 1st way). There is nothing I can >think of that would make the 2nd way listed above significant more difficult to >do. There is no good reason, I can think of, for using the 1st way in preference >to the 2nd one. > >I hope this is more clear, otherwise, I give up. > [big snip] Nalimov tablebases store distance-to-mate and only distance-to-mate. I hope this is clear, and I am sure you understand clearly my statement. If you do not want to believe me, then I give up. José.
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.