acase wrote:If there is anyone else who has a rebuttal to 19...Bg4!! to prove Fischer (and me) wrong, I would love to hear from you!, I would like to think that I covered all of the variations, but I know it is very possible that a patzer like me may have missed something that you, my fellow computer chess aficionados may see.
Please, a PGN with all your variations.
Houdini is probably better than Stockfish to analyze such positions (with mating threats).
My PGN, as you can imagine, has been edited so many times over a few months that it is a very sloppy mess and would probably be illegible for most because it is so crappy. I would be embarrassed to post it (so I will not). I prefer that others post a variation they think may refute 19...Bg4!! and then I'll post a rebuttal or I'll congratulate them for busting 19...Bg4!!
The whole thing looks like a study and the engines perform rather poor in getting the tactical shots one after another.
I really wonder how much Fischer might have been able to consider exactly on the board
The whole thing looks like a study and the engines perform rather poor in getting the tactical shots one after another.
I really wonder how much Fischer might have been able to consider exactly on the board
Peter, after looking at it I completely agree with your 22.a6 as being the best move to put up the most resistance. It forces white to divert his kingside plans to deal with white's queenside counterplay and keeps the crucial H file closed. You are also correct that it still loses. I agree with almost all of your moves for black with the exception of diverting from your line at move 32.
[d]r3r3/p4pk1/5np1/2Pp1q1p/3PpP2/2N2bPP/QR3P1K/2B2R2 b - - 0 32
and instead of playing 32...Rab8 here, I would bring the other rook on e8 over by playing 32...Reb8 so I could keep the rook on a8 behind the passed pawn on a7.
[d]rr6/p4pk1/5np1/2Pp1q1p/3PpP2/2N2bPP/QR3P1K/2B2R2 w - - 0 33
Now if 33.h4? is played here we have 33...a5 34.Rb5 e3 and black has a clear victory, so instead of 33.h4 in this position perhaps white should play 33.Rb5 which also loses but takes longer.
acase wrote:
No program solved it then, and none of the programs I have tried to date have ever solved this position
Just want to tell, that I finally found a SF- setting able to select the best move, even if it takes more than 4 hours with 24 threads and 32 Gb hash.
That's a version of the so called SF mate-finder, Ipman added some adjustable parameters for every single figure, and especially two more seem very interesting, cause to change only the one for middlegames or the other one for endgames to about half up to two thirds of the default value gives better tactical solving in many tricky positions I tried.
r3r1k1/pp1q1p2/2p2npb/PPPp1bnp/3PpN2/2N1P1PP/1R1B1PBK/3Q1R2 b - - 0 1
acase wrote:
No program solved it then, and none of the programs I have tried to date have ever solved this position
Just want to tell, that I finally found a SF- setting able to select the best move, even if it takes more than 4 hours with 24 threads and 32 Gb hash.
That's a version of the so called SF mate-finder, Ipman added some adjustable parameters for every single figure, and especially two more seem very interesting, cause to change only the one for middlegames or the other one for endgames to about half up to two thirds of the default value gives better tactical solving in many tricky positions I tried.
r3r1k1/pp1q1p2/2p2npb/PPPp1bnp/3PpN2/2N1P1PP/1R1B1PBK/3Q1R2 b - - 0 1
Sorry for german abbrevations, forgot to change that at beginning,
Of course pv and eval are as well as non-telling, but better than nothing at all.
Hi Peter, while it looks like the SF matefinder found the first move here, I don't think it will find a correct winning continuation. The evaluation only shows very slightly better (or worse, I'm not sure what GUI you are using here) than equality in this position which indicates that the program still doesn't understand the position.
If you look earlier in the thread, the poster named "Gary" posted a modified Stockfish version's analysis in which it found the first move also, but was clueless as to how to continue correctly.
By the way, that's a very impressive computer you have there.
acase wrote:[ If you look earlier in the thread, the poster named "Gary" posted a modified Stockfish version's analysis in which it found the first move also, but was clueless as to how to continue correctly.
Of course you're right and I well noticed Gary's posting. I will probably find some more settings of different engines with especially for this one and only tuned position "solving" it much faster, if you look for the first move only and no, neither the pv nor the eval say a thing here. But I yet wanted to show this special setting being able without change of the value of a single piece's eval neither nor a special parameter of search like nullmove pruning, to solve several positions I tried of high tactical difficulties
peter wrote:But I yet wanted to show this special setting being able without change of the value of a single piece's eval neither nor a special parameter of search like nullmove pruning, to solve several positions I tried of high tactical difficulties
Looks like you succeeded then quite well on this position, and I certainly like the idea.
