Author: Günther Simon
Date: 12:38:47 12/02/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 02, 2005 at 14:56:48, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 02, 2005 at 14:35:02, chandler yergin wrote: > >>On December 02, 2005 at 14:27:36, Rob Basham wrote: >> >>>On December 02, 2005 at 14:22:54, chandler yergin wrote: >>> >>>>On December 02, 2005 at 12:21:55, F. Huber wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 02, 2005 at 11:12:54, chandler yergin wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 02, 2005 at 10:42:16, Rob Basham wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>[D]3Q4/bp3pp1/6k1/8/7R/6p1/B2p1PP1/q1rn2K1 w - - 0 1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>This is the recent neat Mate in 19 problem...after 5 moves are played... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>1. Qd3+ >>>>>>> >>>>>>>CM-9000 ann. mate in 14 in 39 seconds.....SKR >>>>>>> >>>>>>>P3_850 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Rob >>>>>> >>>>>>Try Mate in 11 in 00:02 >>>>>>New game >>>>>>[D]3Q4/bp3pp1/6k1/8/7R/6p1/B2p1PP1/q1rn2K1 w - - 0 1 >>>>>> >>>>>>Analysis by Shredder 8: >>>>>> >>>>>>1.Qxd2 Nxf2+ 2.Qe1 >>>>>> -+ (-6.24) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qxd2 Nxf2+ 2.Qd1 Nxd1+ 3.Rd4 >>>>>> -+ (-16.91) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qxd2 Nxf2+ 2.Qd1 Nxd1+ 3.Rd4 >>>>>> -+ (-16.91) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qh8 gxf2+ 2.Kf1 Qxa2 >>>>>> -+ (-12.13) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qh8 Qxa2 >>>>>> -+ (-10.84) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qh8 gxf2+ 2.Kf1 Qxa2 >>>>>> -+ (-10.77) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd5 Nxf2# >>>>>> -+ (-8.59) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd5 Nxf2# >>>>>> -+ (-8.59) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Bc4 Nxf2+ >>>>>> -+ (-8.46) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Bc4 Nxf2+ 2.Bf1 >>>>>> -+ (-8.46) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Bd5 Nxf2# >>>>>> -+ (-8.41) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Bd5 Nxf2# >>>>>> -+ (-8.41) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 2/2 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 3/3 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 4/4 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 5/5 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 6/6 00:00:00 >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 7/7 00:00:00 1kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 8/8 00:00:00 2kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 9/9 00:00:00 4kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 10/10 00:00:00 6kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 11/11 00:00:00 14kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 12/12 00:00:00 26kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 13/13 00:00:00 41kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 14/14 00:00:00 75kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 15/15 00:00:01 153kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ >>>>>> +- (#14) Depth: 16/16 00:00:01 247kN >>>>>>1.Qd3+ f5 2.Qxg3+ Kf6 3.Qd6+ Kg5 4.Rh5+ Kxh5 5.Qxd2 >>>>>> +- (#11) Depth: 17/18 00:00:02 596kN >>>>>> >>>>>>(, MyTown 02.12.2005) >>>>> >>>>>And once again a wrong mate announcement by Shredder 8 - if I were you I would >>>>>throw away this engine! >>>>> >>>>>BTW, how should a #19 become a #11 after 5 moves??? >>>>> >>>>>Franz. >>>> >>>>Easy.. it sees it. It may not be the best line and the evaluation may change >>>>after deeper search! >>>>If you like, I'll let it run longer. But how did you like the speed at which >>>>it found Mate in 14? >>>>Hmmm? >>> >>>OK.....you win......that's pretty fast! >>>But how did a mate in 14 become a "mate in 11"...? >> >>It doesn't of course! Because it finds one line leading to Mate in 11, doesn't >>mean it is the best line, & with each Ply search the PV changes. >>It is Mate in 14. >>OK? >>Nothing wrong with the Search function. >> The Engine does what it's supposed to do. > >No > >Engines can say mate in 14 even when there is mate in 11 but not the opposite. > >Engines should say mate in 11 for white only when they checked all defences of >black and found that there is no defence against mate in 11. > >It is the way that engines without bugs work. > >Uri Uri, I believe it is a waste of time trying to teach Chandler something he will not believe due to his fixed ancient opinions (most made up from CB manuals of the 90ies...) IIRC you like me already replied once not to talk about computerchess with him anymore, no idea why we both tried again ;) Guenther
This page took 0.02 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.