A standard evoluation sometimes doesn't match to many pawn endgames.
Rybka 4.1 4CPU - Komodo 5 1CPU (The Champions 2012 - 29 minutes / 40 moves)
[d]8/ppk5/6p1/4pbP1/8/P3N3/1PP5/2K5 b - - 0 43
In draw position, Black plays 43...Kd6 and after 44.Nxf5 gxf5 45.c4 loses immediately.
Two chain passed pawns are weaker than isolated.
That reminds me of a recent game 40/2 I played vs Chessmaster personality
GM Zukertort. After the last inviting move 24.Rd1-d4! I was hoping for
some exchanges...
[d]6k1/1pp4p/p1p5/3r4/3R2b1/P1P2N2/1P3KPP/8 b - - 0 24
And black happily went into a lost pawn ending by taking on f3 and d4
(24.-Bxf3 25.Kxf3 Rxd4 26.cxd4) and we have this position (won for white)
lech wrote:A standard evoluation sometimes doesn't match to many pawn endgames.
Rybka 4.1 4CPU - Komodo 5 1CPU (The Champions 2012 - 29 minutes / 40 moves)
[d]8/ppk5/6p1/4pbP1/8/P3N3/1PP5/2K5 b - - 0 43
In draw position, Black plays 43...Kd6 and after 44.Nxf5 gxf5 45.c4 loses immediately.
Two chain passed pawns are weaker than isolated.
Movei is relatively fast here.
with one thread(movei is not SMP) less than 1 minute(when houdini3 needs more than it even with 4 threads).
The reason is that I simply extend transition to pawn endgames when the extension is not constant and I extend more plies when the remaining depth is bigger.
Movei needs depth 19 to see a positive score after Nxf5+ gxf5 but needs only depth 16 to find Nxf5+ with a positive score
avoiding Kd6 is depth 17 for movei
Note that I did not work on movei lately and I am very surprised that my simple extension trick make it faster even today relative to top programs like houdini or critter(critter used 8 threads in the analysis).