Author: Chessfun
Date: 08:12:53 12/26/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 2005 at 08:50:21, Sune Larsson wrote: > > Why not settle this once and for all by making a *Ratinglist for Endings*? > > There are a lot of testers out there with good hardware so I think it will > be possible. Actually I mailed Heinz van Kempen about this. Such a ratinglist > would be very interesting, IMO. While a member of CEGT I proposed something along those lines. I think it is actually a good idea to make an endgame ratinglist, none currently that I'm aware of are doing such a thing. > As a start I suggest the Nunn positions. There are 10 of them but n:o 3 is not > valid since there are only 5 pieces in that position. Short description: > > 1+4 are rook endings > 2 is pawn ending > 5 is queen ending > 6 is knight ending > 7 is bishop vs knight ending > 8 is opposite coloured bishops ending > 9 is bishop ending (same colour) > 10 is rooks+opposite coloured bishops ending > > I suggest 40 moves in 40 minutes. Additional positions are of course > possible - like "good knight vs bad bishop" - themes like "rook behind the > pawn" - "activity in rookendings" etc. > > I have played several games from NunnEnding1 - and you'll be surprised of > how revealing this simple position is! I agree with Nunn as a start you would as you say want to add additional positions however it isn't so easy to pick them. I like the time controls on fast hardware all testers should have 5 piece tablebases. Personally I can't see myself doing it right now but it is an interesting subject. Sarah.
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.