Is it stockfish or is it just me?

You're missing my point. I'm not arguing that the position's won, I'm arguing that Stockfish got it right: White has an extra pawn, but it's a draw. 

So your point is that even though the position is drawn, Stockfish 5 has correctly counted the pawns?

Would you therefore say Stockfish 6 has counted the pawns wrongly, since it calls the position even?

Let's look at a different position.  With White to move, would you evaluate this by material count?  If not, why not?  What's the difference?  In both positions, material count doesn't matter to the evaluation.

I am having a hard time believing your point is to count material in positions where it doesn't matter.

If you count the pawns you will see that both sides have the same number of pawns

SmyslovFan wrote:

RCMorea wrote:

I reran it and this is the depth:

Assessments in order:

Depth 30ish (went by too fast to really see) was 1.09.

Depth 40ish (went by pretty fast) was 1.00.

Depth 43/48 (not sure what the two numbers mean) was .56.

Depth 44 and thereafter was 0.0.  It's never going to change back.

More important, you should be able to see for yourself that there is no way for the White king to get in.  The Black king can block him forever.

Actually, you are rated 2200 at standard...you MUST see this!

You're missing my point. I'm not arguing that the position's won, I'm arguing that Stockfish got it right: White has an extra pawn, but it's a draw. 

Its interesting that Houdini only gives a 0.37 advantage to white in the initial position .  Ofcourse this is likely due to whites space advantage , but the position is drawn . I wonder how other popular engines evaluate the position ? 

Rubik,  looks like you are right.  Even less reason for a plus score for White.

Reb, I don't know about all of them, but I did put Hiarcs 13 on it and it gave an even stronger plus to White (almost 2.00, if I recall).

Such an assessment makes me trust engines even less ...   That assessment is just ridiculous . 

It's just me ! Mate in 16.
----------------------------
The real skill on the real shortest game (bullet-1 minute). There's no time to analyse in depth. It was wonderful game like illussion of Tal's. :

Check it out :
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=1083032102

Houdini may not be the strongest engine nowadays but it has a very stable and reliable eval function imo.  I always found the eval on Stockfish a bit "excitable", although I haven't tested Stockfish 6 too much.

I'll try one more time. It is absolutely clear which side is trying to win this position. Humans and engines agree. Humans and Stockfish also agree that white's advantage isn't enough to win.

All this hot air about misevaluations is just that.

Well, I guess I'll have to miss your point.  Because neither side is trying for a win.  But, if you think otherwise, so be it.

The point that I think RCMorea is trying to make is that if the position is objectively drawn, the correct eval should be 0.00.  It doesn't matter if one side has "(practical) winning chances" or not.

Dead draw from my analysis

Smyslov Fan,

 What makes you say that +0.81 isn't a winning advantage for white? For computers the level at stockfish 0.81 should be a win.

We have agreed that my position is drawn. Due to the fact that Stockfish 5 gave a decent advantage for white (+0.81), we must conclude that it misevaluated this position.

There are no 'practical chances.'

Unless your engine is a decade old, or your UI is crap, it will claim dead equality. Currently using the devel versions of PedantFish (a Stockfish clone written in assembly) and it claims +0.08 right from the start.

Oh +0.08 . White is Winning !! 

Right IM ?

I think whites win because of Trump

I couldn't believe PedantFish was a real engine's name until I googled it. Aptly named though.

" Stockfish is just a fish brain destroying an emotion"