Two Ancient Verdicts Fell in One Morning: The Books Say Red Wins, the Engine Says Black Mates

This morning, 3 November 2026, the latest verification run of our Xiangqi Endgame Dictionary finished: 161 more positions confirmed by the engine, bringing the verified total to 533 of 1,800. But the most significant number of the morning is not 161 — it is 2. Two positions changed labels in the other direction: the ancient books record a win for Red, while the Fairy-Stockfish engine (with its NNUE network) proves that Black is the side delivering checkmate, through a forced win replayed and validated move by move. Both overturned verdicts sat undisturbed in print for centuries, copied faithfully from generation to generation — until this morning.

Jin Cun De Chi （进寸得尺） from Meng Ru Shen Ji: as of this morning, its label is ⚖️ disputed.

Case one: Jin Cun De Chi — an optimistic name whose verdict did not survive the machine

The position's name is an optimistic idiom: advance an inch, gain a foot — every small step forward trades for a large stretch of ground. In 《夢入神機》 (Meng Ru Shen Ji, "Dreaming into the Divine Mechanism"), game 52, the book's conclusion is unambiguous: Red wins. A student opens the book, sees Red wins, and sets up the position to find how.

This morning the engine searched the other way — and closed the case: Black checkmates Red in 10 moves, the main line replayed through the game's own legal-move generator, with no move missing and none added. By the dictionary's standard, a complete forced win running against the book's verdict is enough to flip the label: Jin Cun De Chi is now ⚖️ disputed. Anyone can open its page, replay those ten moves on the board, and watch exactly where Red collapses.

Case two: Ji Zhu Wen Chou — there is a swift execution, but Black carries it out

Ji Zhu Wen Chou （疾诛文丑）, from Yuan Shen Hai Kuo, game 217: the book says Red wins; in fact Black mates in 7.

The second position carries a name straight out of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms: 疾诛文丑, "the swift execution of Wen Chou," recalling Guan Yu's famous beheading of Yuan Shao's general. In 《渊深海阔》 (Yuan Shen Hai Kuo, "Deep as the Abyss, Vast as the Sea"), game 217, the book records Red wins — a quick, clean kill by Red, just as the name promises.

The engine agrees with half of that. There is indeed a swift execution in this position — except the executioner is Black, checkmating Red in 7 moves. The seven-move line has been validated in full, and Ji Zhu Wen Chou received the same ⚖️ disputed label this morning. Two cases in one morning take the dictionary's disputed count from one to three.

Disputes did not begin with computers

The dictionary's first disputed position — until this morning its only one — is a reminder that arguing with the old books did not start with engines. Wild Horse Ploughing the Field first appears in 《蕉窗逸品》 (Jiaochuang Yipin, 1879) with the verdict draw; three independent transmissions of the original position agree character for character. Later editors, however, refused to leave it alone: one edition added an edge pawn for Red, another added edge pawns for both sides — altering the position itself — and printed a Black win. When scholars of the past disagreed with a book, they voted with pawns. Engine-era research likewise leans toward Black. Our dictionary keeps the 1879 original as canonical, tells the whole story in its note, and carries the disputed label — because this argument is nearly 150 years old. The engine did not invent the auditing of ancient books; it is simply the strictest auditor in a long line of them.

What "disputed" means — and an invitation

The dictionary keeps three labels with a hard border between them: a position flips to ⚖️ disputed only when a complete forced win, replayed legally move by move, runs against the book's printed verdict — a high engine evaluation or a half-finished search never suffices. Today's full picture: 533 positions ✓ verified, 1,264 unverified (result per the ancient books), 3 ⚖️ disputed.

And verification is not the server's job alone. Open the page of Jin Cun De Chi or Ji Zhu Wen Chou and you can replay the exact line the engine used to overturn the book — or do the more interesting opposite: take Red's side against the engine at its strongest level and try to prove the book right. If you hold a better result than the overturned verdict claims, your game becomes evidence to reconsider — and the player who breaks a verdict is credited permanently on the position's page. The old books were right about a great many positions. In these two, as of this morning, the burden of proof has changed sides.

From the Xiangqi Endgame Dictionary series: Ancient Books Meet Engines · Why Some Positions Become Classics · The Four Great Xiangqi Endgames.