Author: Peter Kappler
Date: 22:08:14 02/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2000 at 20:21:48, Dann Corbit wrote: >Here is the crafty log after 15 plies have completed. Of course, the ce score >is pretty much a bunch of hooey, since it is a draw. Dann, This position looks like a win to me. You're right that White needs to exchange rooks, but I think it's highly unlikely that this can happen. Black is very much in control in this position, and should easily win the two pawns, leading to a KRNN vs KR endgame, which I think must be a win. As for the analysis you posted - I can only assume that you didn't look very closely at the final variation. --Peter >But I think there is no way to prove that a program *would* draw or *would* >mate, unless you play it out. > >L:\>type log.014 >pondering enabled. >EGTB cache memory = 6M bytes. >hash table memory = 48M bytes. >pawn hash table memory = 16M bytes. >play best book line after search. >EGTB access enabled >using tbpath=./TB >4 piece tablebase files found >PFGA: EPD record: 1 >end-game phase > clearing hash tables > time surplus 0.00 time limit 116:40 (116:40) > nss depth time score variation (1) >White(1): exit > > 8 17.05 -4.65 1. Ke3 Nxb2 2. Kd4 Rg5 3. Rh6 Nxc3 > 4. Kxc3 Rg2 > 8-> 17.16 -4.65 1. Ke3 Nxb2 2. Kd4 Rg5 3. Rh6 Nxc3 > 4. Kxc3 Rg2 > 9 18.55 -4.60 1. Ke3 Nxb2 2. Kd4 Rg5 3. Rh6 Nxc3 > 4. Kxc3 Rg2 5. Kd4 > 9-> 18.59 -4.60 1. Ke3 Nxb2 2. Kd4 Rg5 3. Rh6 Nxc3 > 4. Kxc3 Rg2 5. Kd4 > 10 24.78 -4.70 1. Ke3 Nc5+ 2. Kd2 Nxb2 3. Rh6 Nba4 > 4. c4 Nb2 5. Kc3 Nxc4 6. Kxc4 > 10-> 25.01 -4.70 1. Ke3 Nc5+ 2. Kd2 Nxb2 3. Rh6 Nba4 > 4. c4 Nb2 5. Kc3 Nxc4 6. Kxc4 > 11 26.45 -- 1. Ke3 > 11 46.88 -5.13 1. Ke3 Nc5+ 2. Kd2 Nxb2 3. Kc1 Nba4 > 4. Rg3 Ne4 5. Rd3+ Kc6 6. c4 Kc5 7. > Ra3 Kxc4 8. Rxa4+ > 11-> 48.90 -5.13 1. Ke3 Nc5+ 2. Kd2 Nxb2 3. Kc1 Nba4 > 4. Rg3 Ne4 5. Rd3+ Kc6 6. c4 Kc5 7. > Ra3 Kxc4 8. Rxa4+ > 12 50.68 -- 1. Ke3 > 12 1:33 -5.92 1. Ke3 Nc5+ 2. Kd4 Re4+ 3. Kd5 Nf4+ > 4. Kxc5 Nxg6 5. Kd5 Re5+ 6. Kd4 Rb5 > 7. b4 Ne5 8. Ke4 Kc6 9. Ke3 Rd5 > 12-> 1:35 -5.92 1. Ke3 Nc5+ 2. Kd4 Re4+ 3. Kd5 Nf4+ > 4. Kxc5 Nxg6 5. Kd5 Re5+ 6. Kd4 Rb5 > 7. b4 Ne5 8. Ke4 Kc6 9. Ke3 Rd5 > 13 3:35 -- 1. Ke3 > 13 4:53 -6.52 1. Ke3 Nxb2 2. Kd4 Rg5 3. Rxg5 Nxg5 > 4. Kc5 Ne6+ 5. Kb6 Kd6 6. Kb5 Nc7+ > 7. Kb4 Kd5 8. Kb3 Nc4 > 13-> 4:56 -6.52 1. Ke3 Nxb2 2. Kd4 Rg5 3. Rxg5 Nxg5 > 4. Kc5 Ne6+ 5. Kb6 Kd6 6. Kb5 Nc7+ > 7. Kb4 Kd5 8. Kb3 Nc4 > 14 14:33 -6.56 1. Ke3 Nxb2 2. Kd4 Rg5 3. Rxg5 Nxg5 > 4. Kc5 Ne6+ 5. Kb6 Kd6 6. Kb5 Nf4 7. > Kb4 Kd5 8. Kb5 Nc4 > 14-> 14:39 -6.56 1. Ke3 Nxb2 2. Kd4 Rg5 3. Rxg5 Nxg5 > 4. Kc5 Ne6+ 5. Kb6 Kd6 6. Kb5 Nf4 7. > Kb4 Kd5 8. Kb5 Nc4 > 15 16:34 -- 1. Ke3 > 15 72:24 -7.02 1. Ke3 Nc5+ 2. Kd2 Nxb2 3. Rg4 Ne4+ > 4. Kc2 Na4 5. c4 Nd6 6. Kb3 Nc5+ 7. > Kc3 Nce4+ 8. Kb3 Rc5 9. Rxe4 Nxe4 10. > Kb4 > 15-> 73:33 -7.02 1. Ke3 Nc5+ 2. Kd2 Nxb2 3. Rg4 Ne4+ > 4. Kc2 Na4 5. c4 Nd6 6. Kb3 Nc5+ 7. > Kc3 Nce4+ 8. Kb3 Rc5 9. Rxe4 Nxe4 10. > Kb4 > >Two knights are not going to mate very often, if both programs have tablebases. >I think a KNNNk tablebase might be fun, though. Playing OTB, give me two >bishops or a rook, at least or I'll be wandering in circles. At least I can >memorize those algorithms. I am pretty sure I could not execute a mate with two >knights, except by accident. > >Playing against a chess program, I would try to manuver an exchange of both >knights for the rook. It might seem good to the chess program since the points >add up, but it would be an awful trade. >;-)
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.