14 Sep 05
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderDunno, not good enough at end games to comment. Kasparov didn't seem to have a problem with declaring forced mate in 25 in his CC game against the world though.
Whaddya think? Should he just have announced "mate in 38" on move 47?
So are you going to show us how it should have been done by a good human player, or are you going to continue ranting in the forums about it?
D
14 Sep 05
Originally posted by RagnorakDidn't he do that after analysis using a specially designed tablebase though?
Dunno, not good enough at end games to comment. Kasparov didn't seem to have a problem with declaring forced mate in 25 in his CC game against the world though.
So are you going to show us how it should have been done by a good human player, or are you going to continue ranting in the forums about it?
D
14 Sep 05
Originally posted by RagnorakSeems I misremembered:
I looked all over the Kasparov Vs the World site, and didn't read anything about engines/tablebases being used. Not 100% on that, obviously.
D
Kasparov admitted that 58...Qf5 would have put up stiffer resistance, but claimed it was also losing, and published a "forced win". Subsequently tablebases showed an error in Kasparov's analysis (a testament to the enduring complexity of the game) but it is reasonable to suppose he would have had time to find the correct continuation had the line in question actually been played.
14 Sep 05
Originally posted by RagnorakI keep forgetting that a 1900 level correspondence player is better than Kasparov; my bad. Getting the King over to the pawn by say 49 ...... Kc5, followed by 50 ..... Qg2 keeping the King away from the pawn would have been a good start. Then you work the King to the pawn. Eventually you have to either force the rook off the rank with the pawn (hard) or by checking force White's King in between the Rook and the pawn. There are a myriad of lines, so giving one possible one wouldn't mean much, but that would be the general plan unless you know that you have mate in 38.
Dunno, not good enough at end games to comment. Kasparov didn't seem to have a problem with declaring forced mate in 25 in his CC game against the world though.
So are you going to show us how it should have been done by a good human player, or are you going to continue ranting in the forums about it?
D
EDIT: I guess Kasparov, being an inferior player to IM, screwed up the 25 move forced mate. Maybe IM could give him some lessons.
14 Sep 05
Originally posted by no1marauderJust a quick point to clarify....
I found this site which has the Nalimov tablebases and they do, indeed, have a K + Q v. K + R + P endgame. I put in the original FEN position of my game with IM with him to move on move 47: the tablebase gives Black having mate in 38 moves. IM make the next 10 moves EXACTLY as the tablebase says. He then varies on move 57 with a move that has a mate calc ...[text shortened]...
The initial FEN position was: 8/2k5/8/4K3/3R2P1/8/6q1/8 b
The game is: Game 1185140
These end game table bases that are being talked about... are they computer programs and thus is it illegal to use them?
Or are they like openning books and thus ok to use as references?
It seems it you have some form of database that given a game position can give you all the moves to a checkmate then surely this is cheating?
14 Sep 05
Originally posted by DeepfaultThey are not databases of moves played, but calculations by a computer program of the moves to mate and how to get there. As far as I can determine, they only go up to 6 pieces now. They are obviously illegal here as they are not databases or books, but instead programmed moves.
Just a quick point to clarify....
These end game table bases that are being talked about... are they computer programs and thus is it illegal to use them?
Or are they like openning books and thus ok to use as references?
It seems it you have some form of database that given a game position can give you all the moves to a checkmate then surely this is cheating?
14 Sep 05
Originally posted by no1marauderThanks no1 and while i have your attention....
They are not databases of moves played, but calculations by a computer program of the moves to mate and how to get there. As far as I can determine, they only go up to 6 pieces now. They are obviously illegal here as they are not databases or books, but instead programmed moves.
I would be grateful if you or somebody else could indulge me further by clarifying a few more points.
Books I understand. But databases just to clarify on this point what are they and where do you get the from?
Are they the web based openning move reference sites i have encounterd or/and sites like chessgames.com? I have always assumed they are but best to check.
Can you download databases or buy them from somewhere?
A site I have recently ecounted is a database of opennings with % attached to each move based on how often they occur in their chess games database.
The key point here is that something can show you the most popular moves, or the moves to follow an openning or indeed what move X played next in a game against Y that happens to follow the same moves your game is, but NOT calculate and suggest a move yes?
Is following a famous game from a chess database exactly cheating as you are using the knowledge of the master?
Curiously is following a game from a game database when one of the players was a computer cheating?
I think some better clarification then do not use engines is needed!!
🙄
14 Sep 05
Originally posted by DeepfaultI'm not going to delve yet again into the never ending database controversy; suffice to say they are allowed here. There are databases you can buy on CD; there are free databases on the web and there are "unfree" databases on the web. They share a common characteristic; they show moves that were made but that alone does not tell you the strength of the move; you have to determine that on your own. This is radically different from a chess engine which tells you what the strongest move is. Some d/b's also have a function which tells you the winning percentages of games in which a particular opening move was made, but the move itself probably had fairly little to do with the ultimate outcome.
Thanks no1 and while i have your attention....
I would be grateful if you or somebody else could indulge me further by clarifying a few more points.
Books I understand. But databases just to clarify on this point what are they and where do you get the from?
Are they the web based openning move reference sites i have encounterd or/and sites like ch ...[text shortened]... omputer cheating?
I think some better clarification then do not use engines is needed!!
🙄
Again, this site allows the use of databases. You may use them in whatever way you please. Many threads have been started and the wisdom of this policy has been addressed many times. ALL correspondence chess organizations and sites that I know of allow their use. I really don't want to be sidetracked into the merits of whether db's SHOULD be allowed here; they are.
18 Sep 05
This is the pgn of one of my games on playchess.com
Please analyse with engines and tell me the % of my engines moves.
Well !! all my moves ( -1) are the first or the second of shredder 9 !!
See the game's time !! 3 minutes.
m'I a cheater ?
[Event "Partita con Elo, 3m + 0s"]
[Site "Sala da gioco principale"]
[Date "2005.09.18"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Temujin"]
[Black "Protagoras1"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A02"]
[WhiteElo "2191"]
[BlackElo "2116"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[TimeControl "180"]
1. f4 {[%emt 0:00:02]} e5 {[%emt 0:00:02]} 2. fxe5 {[%emt 0:00:02]} d6 {
[%emt 0:00:01]} 3. exd6 {[%emt 0:00:01]} Bxd6 {[%emt 0:00:01]} 4. Nf3 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} g5 {[%emt 0:00:01]} 5. g3 {[%emt 0:00:01]} g4 {[%emt 0:00:03]}
6. Nh4 {[%emt 0:00:01]} Be7 {[%emt 0:00:02]} 7. Ng2 {[%emt 0:00:02]} h5 {
[%emt 0:00:01]} 8. d4 {[%emt 0:00:02]} h4 {[%emt 0:00:01]} 9. Bf4 {
[%emt 0:00:01]} h3 {[%emt 0:00:02]} 10. Ne3 {[%emt 0:00:02]} b6 {[%emt 0:00:11]
} 11. Qd3 {[%emt 0:00:02]} Bb7 {[%emt 0:00:02]} 12. Rg1 {[%emt 0:00:01]} Nf6 {
[%emt 0:00:05]} 13. Nf5 {[%emt 0:00:06]} Qd5 {[%emt 0:00:17]} (13... Be4 14.
Qb5+ c6 15. Qe5) 14. Nxe7 {[%emt 0:00:05]} Kxe7 {[%emt 0:00:00]} 15. Nc3 {
[%emt 0:00:06]} Qa5 {[%emt 0:00:05]} 16. O-O-O {[%emt 0:00:10]} Nbd7 {
[%emt 0:00:03]} 17. e4 {[%emt 0:00:09]} Rae8 {[%emt 0:00:06]} 18. Bxc7 {
[%emt 0:00:08]} Rc8 {[%emt 0:00:02]} 19. Bf4 {[%emt 0:00:11]} Rhd8 {
[%emt 0:00:17]} 20. e5 {[%emt 0:00:02]} Nd5 {[%emt 0:00:03]} 21. Bg5+ {
[%emt 0:00:03]} Ke8 {[%emt 0:00:11]} 22. Nxd5 {[%emt 0:00:16]} Bxd5 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} 23. a3 {[%emt 0:00:07]} Bf3 {[%emt 0:00:20]} 24. Be2 {
[%emt 0:00:08]} Nxe5 {[%emt 0:00:08]} 25. Qe3 {[%emt 0:00:05]} Qa4 {
[%emt 0:00:26]} 26. Qxe5+ {[%emt 0:00:03]} Kd7 {[%emt 0:00:02]} 27. Bb5+ {
Protagoras1 poddaje siê (Lag: Av=0.30s, max=0.7s) [%emt 0:00:06]} 1-0
For David Tebb and police cheating.
All your system is wrong.
18 Sep 05
1 edit
Originally posted by El BrutoAll your moves are Fritz.
This is the pgn of one of my games on playchess.com
Please analyse with engines and tell me the % of my engines moves.
Well !! all my moves ( -1) are the first or the second of shredder 9 !!
See the game's time !! 3 minutes.
m'I a cheater ?
[Event "Partita con Elo, 3m + 0s"]
[Site "Sala da gioco principale"]
[Date "2005.09.18"]
[Round "?" ...[text shortened]... max=0.7s) [%emt 0:00:06]} 1-0
For David Tebb and police cheating.
All your system is wrong.
Zerowing is so oldschool.