Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:03:32 02/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2000 at 00:04:39, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>On February 06, 2000 at 22:06:45, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On February 06, 2000 at 19:30:53, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>>
>>>On February 06, 2000 at 19:01:00, Alexander Kure wrote:
>>>
>>>>[Event "ICC 75 10 u"]
>>>>[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
>>>>[Date "2000.02.06"]
>>>>[Round "-"]
>>>>[White "Insomniac"]
>>>>[Black "crafty"]
>>>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>>>[ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
>>>>[WhiteElo "2000"]
>>>>[BlackElo "2601"]
>>>>[Opening "Giuoco Pianissimo: Canal variation"]
>>>>[ECO "C28"]
>>>>[NIC "VG.02"]
>>>>[Time "15:46:01"]
>>>>[TimeControl "4500+10"]
>>>>
>>>>1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. d3 Bc5 5. Nf3 d6 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bxf6 Qxf6 8.
>>>>Nd5 Qd8 9. c3 Ne7 10. d4 Nxd5 11. dxc5 Nf4 12. Bb5+ Bd7 13. Bxd7+ Qxd7 14.
>>>>g3 Nh3 15. cxd6 cxd6 16. Qd5 Qa4 17. Kf1 O-O-O 18. Kg2 Qd7 19. Rhd1 Qg4 20.
>>>>Nxe5 dxe5 21. Qc5+ Kb8 22. Qxe5+ Ka8 23. f3 Qg5 24. Qc7 Rc8 25. Qxf7 Rhf8
>>>>26. Qd7 Nf4+ 27. Kh1 Qh5 28. gxf4 Qxf3+ 29. Kg1 Qxf4 30. Rd2 Qg5+ 31. Rg2
>>>>Qe3+ 32. Kh1 Qxe4 33. Qd4 Qc6 34. Kg1 g5 35. Rd1 Qe6 36. a3 Rf4 37. Qd7 Qe3+
>>>>38. Kh1 Rb8 39. Qd3 Qe7 40. Re2 Qf6 41. Qh3 g4 42. Qg2 h5 43. Rde1 h4 44.
>>>>Re6 Qf8 45. R6e3 Qf5 46. Re5 Qf7 47. Re7 h3 48. Qe2 Qd5+ 49. Kg1 Qc5+ 50.
>>>>Qe3 Qc6 51. Qe2 Qb6+ 52. Kh1 g3 53. hxg3 Rf2 54. Qe6 Qxb2 55. Qxh3 Qxc3 56.
>>>>R7e3 Qc6+ 57. Kg1 Rf3 58. Rxf3 Qxf3 59. a4 a6 60. Qg2 Qa3 61. Re4 Rf8 62.
>>>>Rf4 Rxf4 63. gxf4 Qxa4 64. Qf3 Qd4+ 65. Kg2 Qd2+ 66. Kh3 Kb8 67. f5 Qh6+ 68.
>>>>Kg4 Qg7+ 69. Kh5 Qf6 70. Qg3+ Kc8 71. Qg6 Qe5 72. Kh6 Qh8+ 73. Kg5 Qe5 74.
>>>>Kh6 Kb8 75. Qg8+ Ka7 76. Qg1+ Ka8 77. Qg8+ Ka7 78. Qg1+ Kb8 79. Qg8+ Ka7
>>>>{Game drawn by repetition}
>>>>1/2-1/2
>>>
>>>What score does Insomniac think it has if it doesn't take the repetition? Queen
>>>and pawn endings have to assessed by how advanced the candidate pawns are, not
>>>by how many pawns you have. Presumably Insomniac hasn't been taught this yet?
>>>:-)
>>>
>>>Dave
>>
>>
>>Crafty was 0.00 for 20 moves or more. I don't think either side had a chance
>>with queens on the board...
>
>Makes sense if White can't hide from checks... but it should be Black bailing
>out with a perpetual, not White.
>
>Dave
Programs don't understand the difference. IE if _you_ can force a repetition,
then I might well play a different one, simply because 0.00 == 0.00 and the
search doesn't know the difference. This is why you often see programs use
oddball values for DRAW. If we both use +.20, then one side will often reject
the repetition and avoid it or else force the opponent to take it. But once
the thing sees that repetition is unavoidable, the search can easily choose
to force it itself, rather than letting the opponent force it. Same score.
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.