Author: Dirk Frickenschmidt
Date: 15:58:22 03/24/98
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Karsten,
first of all thanks for playing such a nice tournament and for all the
interesting games you put here!
One question:
How did the considerable hardware advantage of Mchess on PII-333Mhz over
the second, Fritz5, on PII-233Mhz and all other programs occur (Mchess
being nearly 50% faster than many others)? Who brought the fast Mchess
machine?
Now sorry I have o correct some comment of yours:
[Event "Mensch-Computer-Turnier"]
[Site "Aufsess"]
[Date "1998.??.??"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Fritz 5 PII-233"]
[Black "Tasc R40 Arm2-30"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B34"]
[PlyCount "89"]
[EventDate "1998.03.??"]
{100032 KB Hash Tables, Power-Books} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4.
Nxd4
Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. e5 Ng8 8. Bc4 Bg7 9. Qf3
{Ab hier muessen beide Rechner selbst nachdenken
translation: from here both machines have to calculate their moves}
This seems to be wrong: as far as I can see Fritz5 still is in powerbook
with 10. Bf4.
Only after the real black fault 10...f6? (which has not been played by
humans before for good reasons) white is finally out of book.
But you wrote:
9... e6 {Der erste errechnete Zug und gleich der spielentscheidende
Fehler!
-1.1: Die gefuerchtete Killerbibliothek?
translation: the first calculated move and at the same time the fault
deciding the game
-1.1: the feared killer-book?}
This comment seems to be quite misleading in several ways:
a) In contrast to some other programs the Fritz5 powerbook does not
contain any "feared killerbook", at least not as far as I have seen and
heard until now.
I have only seen some allegations from Ossi Weiner so far, which were
missing *any* evidence for raising such serious suspicion and which I
until now have to consider as quite dirty unless finally proven by
facts.
b) the position is well known, from the game Leonhard-Tartakower in
Karlsbad 1907 up to Suetin - Kortchnoi (played in an URS championship in
1954) and even during the the 80s of our century played by players like
Nigel Short and Judit Polgar.
All in all a good database should show more than 80 games with the moves
up to Qf3, from the beginning of the century up to the late 90s.
So asking if this was a a killer line is far from reality from this view
again.
The contrary is true.
c) It may indeed be questionable if black should choose such a system at
all, paying with very slow development for this kind of fianchetto, and
indeed gaining not more than 32% in my database.
But I really doubt if 9...e6 is the move to be criticized as the losing
move. At this point black already had taken back the knight to g8,
resulting in a position which no modern chess program would prefer for
black, being that much back in development.
Instead e6, in fact being the main human choice in this position
(besides ...f5 and ...f6) hardly can be blamed: it's only the logical
consequence of what has happened before - and besides was preferred by
players like Tartakower or Kortchnoi. Both lost, but hardly for ...e6.
10. Bf4 f6 *This* is the first move unknown in my database, and probably
not the best.
Hope I could help.
Kind regards from Dirk
This page took 0.04 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.