New version of Tactical Insanity test

[Vinvin]

Here : 4b1B1/6p1/3k3p/p3p3/6PP/1P3K2/4P3/8 b - - bm Bc6+; id "TI-e.109";
g5 seems to be winning also (transposition).

[Vinvin]

One more question, here : 8/8/1kn5/6Rp/1P5P/2K3P1/4b3/8 w - - bm b5; id "TI-e.056";
How does white win after 1.b5 Na7 ?
8/n7/1k6/1P4Rp/7P/2K3P1/4b3/8 w - - 1 2

Sting said this:
8/n7/1k6/1P4Rp/7P/2K3P1/4b3/8 w - - acd 44; acs 594 ; acn 7203383382; ce 359 ; bm Kb4; pv Kb4 Nxb5 g4 Bxg4 Rg6+ Kc7 Kxb5 Be2+ Kc5 Kd7 Kd4 Bg4 Kd5 Ke7 Rh6 Kf7 Ke5 Be2 Rc6 Bd1 Rd6 Bg4 Ra6 Bd1 Ra7+ Kg6 Ra2 Kf7 Ra3 Kg6 Ra1 Bg4 Rf1 Kg7 Rf6;

But I am investigating further.

Sting has no tablebase, that's probably why it's the only engine who doesn't score 0.00 here

[BBauer]

Looks like Kg6 is losing. Kf8 holds the draw if syzygy is right.
Kind regards
Bernhard

[Vinvin]

For this one : 3r2k1/1Q4bp/4p1p1/4n3/4N3/1P5q/1P1BB2P/3KR3 w - - bm Qb6; id "TI-e.113";
A lot of moves are easy win :

Code: Select all

Stockfish_180812_x64_modern:

 27/54	01:06	 625 234 869	9 449 345	+4,57	1.Rf1 Qe3 2.Qe7 Qxb3+ 3.Ke1 Nd3+ 4.Bxd3 Qxd3 5.Qxe6+ Kh8 6.Rf7 Qb1+ 7.Ke2 Qd3+ 8.Kf2 Qd4+ 9.Kf1 Qe5 10.Qxe5 Bxe5 11.b4 Kg8 12.Re7 Rf8+ 13.Kg2 Bd4 14.Rd7 Bg7 15.b5 Rb8 16.Rd5 Kf7 17.Kf3 Ke6 18.Rd6+ Kf7 19.Rd7+ Kg8 20.Rd5 Rf8+ 21.Ke2
 27/47	01:06	 625 234 869	9 449 345	+4,57	1.Rg1 h6 2.Qb6 Qh4 3.Rg3 Kh8 4.b4 Rc8 5.Qe3 Nc4 6.Bxc4 Rxc4 7.Nd6 Qh5+ 8.Qf3 Rh4 9.Qxh5 Rxh5 10.Rxg6 Bxb2 11.Rxh6+ Rxh6 12.Bxh6 Bd4 13.Kc2 Kh7 14.Bf4 e5 15.Nf5 Kg6 16.Nxd4 exf4
 27/42	01:06	 625 234 869	9 449 345	+5,11	1.Kc1 Nd3+ 2.Bxd3 Qxd3 3.h4 Qd5 4.Qc7 Rf8 5.Qc4 Rf5 6.Kc2 h6 7.Nc3 Qxc4 8.bxc4 Rh5 9.Rxe6 Rxh4 10.Rxg6 Kf7 11.Rc6 h5 12.Nd5 Be5 13.Bc3 Rh2+ 14.Kb3 Bxc3 15.Kxc3 Rh3+ 16.Kd4 Rb3 17.Rh6 Kg8
 27/50	01:06	 625 234 869	9 449 345	+5,14	1.Kc2 Nf3 2.Nf6+ Bxf6 3.Qxf3 Qxf3 4.Bxf3 Bxb2 5.Rxe6 Kf7 6.Re2 Ba3 7.Bc3 Rb8 8.Bd5+ Kf8 9.Be5 Rc8+ 10.Bc4 Bb4 11.Kb2 Ra8 12.Rf2+ Ke8 13.Rf7 Ra5 14.Bg3 h5 15.Rb7 Be7 16.Rb8+ Kd7 17.Rb6 Ke8 18.Rxg6 Rf5 19.Rg8+ Rf8 20.Rxf8+ Kxf8 21.Kc3 Bf6+ 22.Kb4 Kg7 23.Kc5 Kh6 24.b4 Be7+ 25.Kb5
 27/50	01:06	 625 234 869	9 449 345	+6,29	1.Qb6 Ra8 2.Rf1 Ra1+ 3.Bc1 Nd7 4.Qb7 Bh6 5.Nd2 Nf8 6.Qf7+ Kh8 7.Qe7 Kg8 8.Bc4 Qg4+ 9.Kc2 Bf4 10.Qf6 g5 11.Re1 Bxd2 12.Kxd2 Qf4+ 13.Qxf4 gxf4 14.Re4 f3 15.Re3 f2 16.Rf3 Kg7 17.Kc2 Ng6 18.Rxf2 Ra7 19.Bxe6 Rc7+ 20.Kd1 Rc6 21.Bd5 Rc7 22.b4 Ne5

[Vinvin]

For this one : 2r3NK/2p3PP/N5k1/8/5n2/2p5/R7/8 w - - bm Ra5; id "TI-e.122";
1.Nc5 seems even stronger than 1.Ra5.

[Dann Corbit]

One more question, here : 8/8/1kn5/6Rp/1P5P/2K3P1/4b3/8 w - - bm b5; id "TI-e.056";
How does white win after 1.b5 Na7 ?
8/n7/1k6/1P4Rp/7P/2K3P1/4b3/8 w - - 1 2

Sting said this:
8/n7/1k6/1P4Rp/7P/2K3P1/4b3/8 w - - acd 44; acs 594 ; acn 7203383382; ce 359 ; bm Kb4; pv Kb4 Nxb5 g4 Bxg4 Rg6+ Kc7 Kxb5 Be2+ Kc5 Kd7 Kd4 Bg4 Kd5 Ke7 Rh6 Kf7 Ke5 Be2 Rc6 Bd1 Rd6 Bg4 Ra6 Bd1 Ra7+ Kg6 Ra2 Kf7 Ra3 Kg6 Ra1 Bg4 Rf1 Kg7 Rf6;

But I am investigating further.

Sting has no tablebase, that's probably why it's the only engine who doesn't score 0.00 here

Yes.
After the first 2 captures, it is a 7 man position, and Lomonosov said draw.

[Dann Corbit]

For this one : 2r3NK/2p3PP/N5k1/8/5n2/2p5/R7/8 w - - bm Ra5; id "TI-e.122";
1.Nc5 seems even stronger than 1.Ra5.

You are correct.
I have ce=1232 in my database for Ra5 at depth 47 and 1170 for Nc5 at depth 40, but a deeper search would undoubtedly over-take.

[Vinvin]

About this one : 2q2rbk/4n1pp/1P1pp1P1/Rnp2P1K/4P1pR/2QP4/1pPB4/rB2NN2 w - - bm b7; id "TI-e.123";
1.Rxb5 and 1.b7 are very close.

Code: Select all

Stockfish_180812_x64_modern:

 36/78	04:51	2 631 159 397	9 028 103	+0,78	1.Rxb5 Qe8 2.Bh6 e5 3.Qd2 Rxb1 4.Bxg7+ Kxg7 5.Qh6+ Kf6 6.Kxg4 hxg6 7.Nf3 Nxf5 8.exf5 Rxf1 9.Rxb2 e4 10.Nd2 Rxf5 11.dxe4 Rf2 12.b7 Qb8 13.Qxf8+ Qxf8 14.Kg3 Kg7 15.b8Q Qxb8 16.Rxb8 Rxd2 17.Rb7+ Kf6 18.Rf4+ Kg5 19.Rb8 Be6 20.Re8 Bd7 21.Ref8 Rd4 22.c3 Rd1 23.Rf1 Rd2 24.R8f2 Rd3+ 25.Rf3 Rd2 26.R1f2 Rd1 27.Re3 c4 28.Ra2 Rg1+ 29.Kf2 Rd1 30.e5 dxe5 31.Rxe5+ Kh6 32.Rc5 Be6 33.Rc7 Kg5 34.Ra5+ Kf4
 36/65	04:51	2 631 159 397	9 028 103	+0,99	1.b7 Qe8 2.b8R Nxc3 3.Rxe8 Rxe8 4.Bxc3 Rxb1 5.Ng3 Rxe1 6.Bxb2 Rg1 7.Ra7 e5 8.Kxg4 Nxg6 9.fxg6 Rf8 10.Kh3 Rf3 11.Rg4 Rf2 12.Ra6 Rgg2 13.Nf1 Rxg4 14.Kxg4 Rxf1 15.Rxd6 Rf6 16.Bxe5 Be6+ 17.Kh4 Rxg6 18.Rd8+ Bg8 19.Rc8 h6 20.Kh3 Kh7 21.Rxc5 Rg5 22.Kh2 Bf7 23.Rc7 Bh5 24.Bd4 Bf3 25.e5 Bd5 26.c4 Be6 27.Re7

[Dann Corbit]

Here : 4b1B1/6p1/3k3p/p3p3/6PP/1P3K2/4P3/8 b - - bm Bc6+; id "TI-e.109";
g5 seems to be winning also (transposition).

You are correct, that move does form a transposition that leads to an identical position.

[Dann Corbit]

About this one : 2q2rbk/4n1pp/1P1pp1P1/Rnp2P1K/4P1pR/2QP4/1pPB4/rB2NN2 w - - bm b7; id "TI-e.123";
1.Rxb5 and 1.b7 are very close.

Code: Select all

Stockfish_180812_x64_modern:

 36/78	04:51	2 631 159 397	9 028 103	+0,78	1.Rxb5 Qe8 2.Bh6 e5 3.Qd2 Rxb1 4.Bxg7+ Kxg7 5.Qh6+ Kf6 6.Kxg4 hxg6 7.Nf3 Nxf5 8.exf5 Rxf1 9.Rxb2 e4 10.Nd2 Rxf5 11.dxe4 Rf2 12.b7 Qb8 13.Qxf8+ Qxf8 14.Kg3 Kg7 15.b8Q Qxb8 16.Rxb8 Rxd2 17.Rb7+ Kf6 18.Rf4+ Kg5 19.Rb8 Be6 20.Re8 Bd7 21.Ref8 Rd4 22.c3 Rd1 23.Rf1 Rd2 24.R8f2 Rd3+ 25.Rf3 Rd2 26.R1f2 Rd1 27.Re3 c4 28.Ra2 Rg1+ 29.Kf2 Rd1 30.e5 dxe5 31.Rxe5+ Kh6 32.Rc5 Be6 33.Rc7 Kg5 34.Ra5+ Kf4
 36/65	04:51	2 631 159 397	9 028 103	+0,99	1.b7 Qe8 2.b8R Nxc3 3.Rxe8 Rxe8 4.Bxc3 Rxb1 5.Ng3 Rxe1 6.Bxb2 Rg1 7.Ra7 e5 8.Kxg4 Nxg6 9.fxg6 Rf8 10.Kh3 Rf3 11.Rg4 Rf2 12.Ra6 Rgg2 13.Nf1 Rxg4 14.Kxg4 Rxf1 15.Rxd6 Rf6 16.Bxe5 Be6+ 17.Kh4 Rxg6 18.Rd8+ Bg8 19.Rc8 h6 20.Kh3 Kh7 21.Rxc5 Rg5 22.Kh2 Bf7 23.Rc7 Bh5 24.Bd4 Bf3 25.e5 Bd5 26.c4 Be6 27.Re7

I have a score of 222 for b7 at depth 51 and a score of 159 for Rxb5 at depth 31, so you are right. They are too close for comfort in a test set.