I see, so we'd have to have a closer look, if the material advantage, White has got after regaining the Queen (Bishop against 1 Pawn remaining) yet ends up in a fortress. That's what your output- line suggests, but then even the eval of your SF dev. would be too high, even more the one of amsFish.
Having had only Forward till now, I'd say maybe latest 33.g5 could be a white blunder leading to the fortress, not sure about that and the moves before.
Anyhow, we can agree, I guess, that the Fat- Fritz- Output isn't the best line after 25.Ng5 (?) Nxa3, which should be drawn by best play of both sides, can't we?
I'd still say 26...Nd6 makes things unnecessarily complicated, maybe the ? is too muc, ?! might be better.
peter wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 6:28 pm
Anyhow, we can agree, I guess, that the Fat- Fritz- Output isn't the best line after 25.Ng5 (?) Nxa3, which should be drawn by best play of both sides, can't we?
I'd still say 26...Nd6 makes things unnecessarily complicated, maybe the ? is too muc, ?! might be better.
zullil wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2019 11:46 am
A much discussed position:
[d]1r3r2/4bpkp/1qb1p1p1/3pP1P1/p1pP1Q2/PpP2N1R/1Pn1B2P/3RB2K w - - bm Qf6 Here we see Lc0 finding Qf6+ instantly. And the claim is made that its line is correct. But is it? The line given starts with Qf6+ Bxf6 gxf6+ Kg8 Ng5.
Here Stockfish seems to show that Bd2 (rather than Ng5) is indeed winning. But how does White win after Ng5 Nxa3?
Qf6+ is best move , but it's just a draw after doing an overnight search with about 1.4 trillion nodes searched. Maybe if somebody searched 100 trillion nodes, they might find something different. That would require dually epyc processors for about a week.
So this contradicts Peter's presumably asmFish result, right?
MikeB wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:48 pm
1r3r2/4bpkp/1qb1p1p1/3pP1P1/p1pP1Q2/PpP2N1R/1Pn1B2P/3RB2K w - - bm Qf6
Qf6+ is best move , but it's just a draw after doing an overnight search with about 1.4 trillion nodes searched. Maybe if somebody searched 100 trillion nodes, they might find something different. That would require dually epyc processors for about a week.
But this contradicts Louis's SFdev search with 1.77 trillion nodes. Was your search with Honey?
Lol guys, lern2analyze, leaving any engine analyzing overnight has always been a waste of time, it gives the illusion of being good because of so many positions, but these discussions could have taken place in Rybka 3 times and people would have said things like "Rybka doesn't see it after X nodes, blah blah blah."
If you know how to guide the engine then you can know the truth about the position without needing to analyze more than 1 trillion nodes. You can do it in 200 positions. But it requires more than the press of a button, and what 200 positions you need to check is the tricky part
Your beliefs create your reality, so be careful what you wish for.
Ovyron wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:36 pm
Lol guys, lern2analyze, leaving any engine analyzing overnight has always been a waste of time, it gives the illusion of being good because of so many positions, but these discussions could have taken place in Rybka 3 times and people would have said things like "Rybka doesn't see it after X nodes, blah blah blah."
If you know how to guide the engine then you can know the truth about the position without needing to analyze more than 1 trillion nodes. You can do it in 200 positions. But it requires more than the press of a button, and what 200 positions you need to check is the tricky part
As is your pattern, another proclamation on the "right" way to do things, with (as always) nothing substantive to offer. No analysis. No evidence to support your claims. Please stick to working on your depth 22 opening book, so that you can win chess games with your special moves. That seems important to you.
I'm now taking the rare step of adding someone to my ignore list; you can keep Chessqueen company.
MikeB wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:48 pm
Qf6+ is best move , but it's just a draw after doing an overnight search with about 1.4 trillion nodes searched. Maybe if somebody searched 100 trillion nodes, they might find something different. That would require dually epyc processors for about a week.
Could you please have a look at the now about 100 times repeated lines after 24.Bd2 (!) instead of 24.Ng5? (or Bf2 (?) as in your output's line)
One thing at least hasn't changed since 2014, when Lyudmil came along with the position.
Nobody is willing to have a closer look at the lines but letting SF and SF branches ponder stand alone and believe in the wrong evals, no matter if now in win- percentage instead of cp.
Nowadays we have LC0 and it even finds 22.Qf6! and 24.Bd2!, yet nobody is willing to see at least the difference to 24.Ng5 (?).
To you and Louis, Mike, I'm outa here again.
Sorry, but it's getting too time- consuming, and I don't talk about hardware- time.
MikeB wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:48 pm
Qf6+ is best move , but it's just a draw after doing an overnight search with about 1.4 trillion nodes searched.
MikeB wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:48 pm
Qf6+ is best move , but it's just a draw after doing an overnight search with about 1.4 trillion nodes searched. Maybe if somebody searched 100 trillion nodes, they might find something different. That would require dually epyc processors for about a week.
Could you please have a look at the now about 100 times repeated lines after 24.Bd2 (!) instead of 24.Ng5? (or Bf2 (?) as in your output's line)
One thing at least hasn't changed since 2014, when Lyudmil came along with the position.
Nobody is willing to have a closer look at the lines but letting SF and SF branches ponder stand alone and believe in the wrong evals, no matter if now in win- percentage instead of cp.
Nowadays we have LC0 and it even finds 22.Qf6! and 24.Bd2!, yet nobody is willing to see at least the difference to 24.Ng5 (?).
To you and Louis, Mike, I'm outa here again.
Sorry, but it's getting too time- consuming, and I don't talk about hardware- time.
Thanks, Peter. I agree that 1. Qf6+ Bxf6 2. gxf6+ Kg8 3. Bd2 wins.
I think 3. Ng5 only draws, but don't see any alternative to 5...Nd6 in this line.
