Well yesterday was a good day - I learned something new! David McAlister solved the problem of the problems.(Sorry about that!) Check the comments under the last post to see for yourself. It seems Fritz isn't the best choice for solving chess problems! I find this strange as you'd think mate is the goal of any game. How could Fritz after 5 minutes of analysis not find a mate in two? I downloaded MateMaster (Freeware), a chess problem solving program, instead and it found the solution in less than 5 seconds. I also ran the problems through Rybka 2.2 and it also failed to find the solution. It got me thinking so I played the first move of the solution into Fritz and instantly it announced mate in one. I'm just curious but I thought the strength of chess engines was the ability to calculate long variations. If they can not find mate in two and three, it questions our reliance - or more specifically our faith in them.
Well that's my thought for today out of the way.
Here's a puzzle to keep you distracted:
A simple one for the weekend. White to play and win.
Solution to the last puzzle:
Lentze - Thornton
Hastings Challengers 1994
1.Bxh7+ Kxh7 2.Qh5+ Kg8 3.Rh3 f6 4.Qh8+ Kf7 5.Ncd6+ Bxd6 6.Nxd6+, or 1...Kf8 2.Rh3 e5 3.Bf5 Resigns as in the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment