szaszkin
Newbie
Posts: 3
|
 |
« on: June 22, 2008, 08:49:40 pm » |
|
It is not clear why 2.Rc1 is not a solution, Rybka: +16.25, instead one should find moves 2.Qe8+ and 3.Rc1, Rybka #11. In my opinion 2.Rc1 should be also solution, since we have a clear win. Maybe for this reason, when I write this words, this relatively easy problem was never solved and has a ranking above 2400!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
drahacikfm
|
|
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2008, 10:26:04 pm » |
|
2.Rc1 IS allowed. You do not get marked wrong for playing it. It is an alternate move, which allows you to continue the problem and play 2.Qe8+. You can verify this by reviewing the problem in the View Problems page and trying to play 2.Rc1. It tells you that it is a good move, but look for a better one.
By the way 1.Rc1 is also allowed as an alternate move, as is 1.Qg4. All the winning moves by Rybka are allowed in this problem, and not marked wrong. So I don't think there is anything wrong with this problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
FIDE Master Drahacik
|
|
|
szaszkin
Newbie
Posts: 3
|
|
« Reply #2 on: June 23, 2008, 04:35:51 am » |
|
Yes, I know that 2.Rc1 is allowed but what I want, to have it as a solution without looking for 2.Qe8 anymore. Why not to allow multiple solutions?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
richard
|
|
« Reply #3 on: June 23, 2008, 05:12:44 am » |
|
Hi szaszkin,
The current situation where winning alternatives are prompted with a "keep looking" response instead of being allowed as correct is a compromise between users who were frustrated at getting marked wrong for not finding the "best move" and those who liked to hunt for the "best move" in positions. Personally I like this compromise and It seems most people prefer this as it gives them a chance to learn more about the position. However if enough people felt it would be better to get points for alternatives instead of being asked to look for a different move, I would certainly consider a change.
Regards,
Richard.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
drahacikfm
|
|
« Reply #4 on: June 23, 2008, 01:01:27 pm » |
|
I prefer the way it is now. I learn more by being forced to find another winning move, and one which is supposedly better than the one I picked.
Also, if you allowed alternates as a correct solution, you would have to go down that variation, and the problem might get thrown out because it violates some of the rules (no more than 2 alternates in one position, etc.) You would lose a lot of problems from the set, unless you just stop the problem immediately when an alternate is played. But that is not very satisfactory.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
FIDE Master Drahacik
|
|
|
|
richard
|
|
« Reply #5 on: June 23, 2008, 02:21:23 pm » |
|
Thanks Drahacik,
I'd forgotten that one of the major reasons behind the current treatment of alternatives is to avoid the explosion of the game tree that having to follow all alternatives would create. For tactics which are more than 1 or 2 moves long the number of potential lines could explode pretty quickly. I agree that allowing alternatives to be correct immediately without going down the line created by the alternative is also highly undesirable.
Regards,
Richard.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
