Move Value DTM DTZ Arc Lengths
a) draw 120 40 40 + 10 + 60 + 10
b) draw 130 65 65 + 60 + 5
c) win 140 40 40 + 50 + 50
d) win 150 30 30 + 40 + 40 + 40
The metrics DTM, DTC, DTZ50 do not "only summarize the total path length". In fact, only DTM does that. The DTR metric is a 'summary statistic' about the whole optimal path but does not specify the total path length. The DTC, DTZ50 and DTZR metrics are about 'the current phase to next relevant event', whether that event is mate/capture, or mate/capture/P-push.
1. Kf4 Kf7 2. Nd4 Ke7 3. Ke5 f4 4. Ngf5+
Kd7 5. Nf3 Kc6 6. Kd4 Kb5 7. Ne7 Kb6 8. Kd5 Kb5 9. Nc6 Ka6
10. Ncd4 Kb7 11. Nb5 Kb6 12. Nd6 Kc7 13. Nc4 Kd7 14. Nb6+
Kc7 15. Kc5 Kb7 16. Nd5 Kc8 17. Kc6 Kd8 18. Kd6 Kc8
19. Nb6+ Kb7 20. Nd7 Ka6 21. Kc6 Ka5 22. Nde5 Ka4 23. Kc5
Kb3 24. Nc6 Kc3 25. Nb4 Kb3 26. Nd5 Ka3 27. Nc3 Kb2 28. Kb4
Kc2 29. Kc4 Kc1 30. Nb5 Kb2 31. Nbd4 Ka2 32. Kc3 Ka3
33. Nb3 Ka2 34. Nc5 Ka3 35. Kc4 Kb2 36. Nd3+ Kc2 37. Nf2
Kb2 38. Nd2 Ka3 39. Kb5 Kb2 40. Kb4 Kc2 41. Nde4 Kb2
42. Ka4 f3 43. Kb4 Ka2 44. Kc3 Ka3 45. Nc5 Ka2 46. Nd7 Ka3
47. Nb6 Ka2 48. Nc4 Kb1 49. Kd2 Ka2 50. Kc2 Ka1 51. Kb3 Kb1
52. Nd3 Ka1 53. Nd2 f2 54. Nb4 f1=Q 55. Nc2# *
Hi,
I want to use John Tamplin's DTZ50 EGTB in http://chess.jaet.org/endings,
in order to obtain the shortest legal mate (of course with Black's best defense) for the following KNNKP position:
6k1/8/8/1N3p2/6K1/6N1/8/8 w
6k1/8/8/1N3p2/6K1/6N1/8/8 w
The DTM EGTB shows that it is a mate in 55, ignoring the 50-move rule.
How do you combine the results of the DTZ50 and DTM EGTBs to find that shortest legal mate?
Note: I found this, but I am not sure it is correct... (curiously, it is also a mate in 55, not more)
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.08.26"]
[Round "?"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "6k1/8/8/1N3p2/6K1/6N1/8/8 w - -"]
1. Kf4 Kf7 2. Nd4 Ke7 3. Ke5 f4 4. Ngf5+
Kd7 5. Nf3 Kc6 6. Kd4 Kb5 7. Ne7 Kb6 8. Kd5 Kb5 9. Nc6 Ka6
10. Ncd4 Kb7 11. Nb5 Kb6 12. Nd6 Kc7 13. Nc4 Kd7 14. Nb6+
Kc7 15. Kc5 Kb7 16. Nd5 Kc8 17. Kc6 Kd8 18. Kd6 Kc8
19. Nb6+ Kb7 20. Nd7 Ka6 21. Kc6 Ka5 22. Nde5 Ka4 23. Kc5
Kb3 24. Nc6 Kc3 25. Nb4 Kb3 26. Nd5 Ka3 27. Nc3 Kb2 28. Kb4
Kc2 29. Kc4 Kc1 30. Nb5 Kb2 31. Nbd4 Ka2 32. Kc3 Ka3
33. Nb3 Ka2 34. Nc5 Ka3 35. Kc4 Kb2 36. Nd3+ Kc2 37. Nf2
Kb2 38. Nd2 Ka3 39. Kb5 Kb2 40. Kb4 Kc2 41. Nde4 Kb2
42. Ka4 f3 43. Kb4 Ka2 44. Kc3 Ka3 45. Nc5 Ka2 46. Nd7 Ka3
47. Nb6 Ka2 48. Nc4 Kb1 49. Kd2 Ka2 50. Kc2 Ka1 51. Kb3 Kb1
52. Nd3 Ka1 53. Nd2 f2 54. Nb4 f1=Q 55. Nc2# *
gambit3 wrote:...this white move is critical as it forces the pawn to move ...
Do you have a reference to a FIDE decision (which postdates MB's findings on 7-manchess) on the applicability (or ad hoc suspension) of the 50-move rule?
Maybe I missed something.
How do you combine the results of the DTZ50 and DTM EGTBs to find that shortest legal mate?
Note: I found this, but I am not sure it is correct... (curiously, it is also a mate in 55, not more)
I want to know, in a theoretical way, how to get the shortest legal mate.
gambit3 wrote:I want to know, in a theoretical way, how to get the shortest legal mate.
at last, right question! and from the formulation of it, already answered two different ways.
Vegan wrote:You missed this mate?
kronsteen wrote:One optimal line is :
1. Kf4 Kf7 2. Nd4 Ke7 3. Ke5 f4 4. Ngf5+ Kd7 5. Nf3 Kc6 6. Kd4 Kb5 7. Ne7 Kb4 8. Nc6+ Kb5 9. Kd5 Ka6 10. Ncd4 Kb7 11. Nb5 Kb6 12. Nd6 Kc7 13. Nc4 Kd7 14. Nb6+ Kc7 15. Kc5 Kb7 16. Nd5 Ka6 17. Nc7+ Kb7 18. Ne6+! Ka6 19.Nd8 Ka7 20. Kb5 Kb8 21. Kc6 Ka7 22. Ne6 Ka6 23. Nc7+ Ka7 24. Nd5 Kb8! 25. Nb6! Ka7 26. Nd7 Ka6 27. Nb8+ Ka5 28. Kc5 Ka4 29. Nc6 Ka3 30. Kd5 Kb3 31. Kd4 Ka2! 32. Na5! Kb1! 33. Nb3! Kc2 34. Nbd2! Kb2 35.Kd3 Ka2 36. Kc3 Ka3 37. Kc4 Ka2 38. Ne4 Kb2 39. Kb4 Kc1 40. Nf2 Kc2 41. Kc4 Kb2 42. Nd2 Ka3 43. Kb5 Kb2 44. Kb4 Kc2 45. Nde4 Kb2 46. Ka4 f3 47.Kb4 Ka2 48. Kc3 Ka3 49. Kc5 Ka2 50. Nd7 Kb1 51. Ne5 Kc1 52. Nc4 Kb1 53. Kd2 Ka2 54. Kc2 Ka1 55. Kb3 Kb1 56. Nd3 Ka1 57. Na3 f2 58. Nb4 f1=Q 59. Nbc2#
ernest wrote:it seems there are some typos.
For instance 48. Kc3 is followed by 49. Kc5
ernest wrote:The DTM50 of my friend then agrees with your pgn (mate in 59)
kronsteen wrote:I welcome the idea of comparing our respective results (using PMs for that will be okay).
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests