Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 14:34:43 09/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 04, 2001 at 16:35:05, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >On September 04, 2001 at 16:03:04, Sune Larsson wrote: > >>On September 04, 2001 at 15:37:40, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >> >>>First the game: >>> >>>Nsubuga,G (2260) - Scott,D [B01] >>>US Open Framingham USA (9), 2001 >>> >>>1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Sf6 3.Sf3 Lg4 4.Le2 Dxd5 5.d4 e6 6.Le3 Le7 7.0-0 c6 8.c4 Da5 >>>9.Sc3 0-0 10.a3 Td8 11.b4 Dc7 12.Se5 Lxe2 13.Dxe2 a5 14.Sd3 axb4 15.axb4 Sa6 >>>16.Tab1 Dc8 17.Tfc1 Sc7 18.h3 Sce8 19.d5 Sc7 20.dxc6 bxc6 21.Se5 Sa6 22.b5 cxb5 >>>23.cxb5 La3 24.Sc6 Te8 25.Sd5 Sxd5 26.Se7+ Lxe7 27.Txc8 Texc8 28.bxa6 Sc3 29.Dc2 >>>Sxb1 30.Dxb1 Txa6 31.Db7 Ta1+ 32.Kh2 Ld6+ 33.g3 Taa8 34.h4 Tab8 35.Da7 Tc6 36.h5 >>>h6 37.Kg2 Tbc8 38.Da4 Lc5 39.Lf4 Lb6 40.Db5 Ld4 41.g4 Tc5 42.Dd7 e5 43.Lg3 Tc2 >>>44.Kh3 T8c7 45.Df5 Tb2 46.g5 Lxf2 47.Dxe5 hxg5 48.Dxb2 Lxg3 49.Kxg3 Tc4 50.Db5 >>>Tf4 51.Dxg5 Tf6 52.De5 Te6 53.Dd4 Th6 54.Dd8+ Kh7 55.Dd5 Te6 56.Df5+ Kg8 57.Dg5 >>>Kf8 58.Dd8+ Te8 59.Dd7 f6 60.Kf4 Te5 61.Dd8+ Kf7 62.Dh8 Tg5 63.Dh7 Kf8 64.Ke4 >>>Te5+ 65.Kd4 Tg5 66.Ke4 Ke8 67.Dg8+ Ke7 68.Kd4 Tg4+ 69.Kd5 Tg5+ 70.Kc6 Tg1 71.h6 >>>Tc1+ 72.Kb5 Tb1+ 73.Kc4 Tc1+ 74.Kb3 gxh6 75.Dg7+ Ke6 76.Dxh6 Tc5 77.Kb4 Te5 >>>78.Kc4 Kf7 79.Dh7+ Ke8 80.Dg6+ Ke7 81.Dg7+ Ke6 82.Df8 Kf5 83.Kd4 Ke6 84.Dc8+ Ke7 >>>85.Dg8 Tg5 86.Dh7+ Kf8 87.Ke4 Te5+ 88.Kf4 Tg5 89.Da7 Te5 90.Db7 Tg5 91.Db8+ Kf7 >>>92.Dc7+ Kf8 93.Dd8+ Kf7 94.Dd7+ Kf8 95.De6 Kg7 96.De7+ Kg6 97.Df8 Tf5+ 98.Ke4 >>>Te5+ 99.Kd4 Kf5 100.Kc3 Ke6 101.Kb2 Tg5 102.Ka1 Te5 103.Dc8+ Kf7 104.Dg4 Ta5+ >>>105.Kb2 Tb5+ 106.Kc3 Te5 107.Kd4 Tg5 108.Dd7+ Kf8 109.Ke4 Te5+ 110.Kf4 Tg5 >>>111.De6 Kg7 112.De7+ Kg6 113.De4+ Kf7 114.Dh7+ Kf8 115.Dc7 ½-½ >>> >>>position after move 77: >>> >>>[D]8/8/4kp1Q/4r3/1K6/8/8/8 w - - 0 78 >>> >>>For a chess program very easy! >> >> Yes, but still no news. A friend of mine is still ashamed of not >> having been able to win a Q vs R ending several years ago! And >> he had around ELO 2400 at that time... Then Walter Browne failed >> his first try vs a computer some years ago - so... ;-) >> >> Sune > >:-) > >For few years I played in a "Simultan" against a Grandmaster, and last 10 >moves me played (german "bereits Blitz!") blitz. In this posiition I give >him my hand (I resigned.): > >(German: hätte ich etwas weiterspielen sollen - it was blitz? ;-) > >Grandmaster - Eduard, after move 66 > >[D]8/8/4r3/3pk3/8/3K1pQ1/8/8 b - - 0 67 > >:) > >Eduard The ending KQKR is much harder to win than most players expect. Both GM Miles & GM Browne have failed to win it against "perfect" computer play. It was once thought such endings were easy and resignable, but computer analysis has changed that viewpoint. Therefore a reasonable conclusion is your resignation is a blunder, though perhaps a defensible decision due to your not knowing the effective methods of defence. Only against a computer program armed with EGTBs is immediate resignation okay. For a computer, it is a piece of cake. There is a way of defending called the 3rd rank defence, which you can get into very easily in the position you give. The method of defence was unforeseen by human players, which was discovered by computer analysis. A long time ago when the results of computer analysis were relatively new, a friend of mine, an NM, got a hold of some of the Thompson EGTBs. He used them to learn how to play KQKR perfectly. A nontrivial task. He did this for 2 reasons: (1) He thought by learning one type of really ending well, it would afford some insight into playing endings more generally. (2) He had the quite realizable fantasy of reaching this ending against an IM or GM and stealing a draw. He told me about a trip to St. Johns Canada where there was a major tournament. There, he ran into a guy who was challenging strong players to try to win this ending against his computer. They almost always failed. Then he ran into my friend and discovered to his astonishment that he could consistently beat the computer in the minimum number of moves. All this should give you an idea of how difficult the ending actually is. When the defending side has a pawn or more, the difficulty of winning is only compounded. > > >>> >>>Analysis by Deep Shredder: >>> >>> 1.00 0:00 +M52++ 1.Dh3+ Ke7 (11) 0.1 >>> 1.00 0:00 +M52 1.Dh3+ Ke7 (12) 0.1 >>> 2.00 0:00 +M52 1.Dh3+ Ke7 (22) 0.2 >>> 2.00 0:00 +M48++ 1.Df8 Kf5 (24) 0.1 >>> 2.00 0:00 +M48 1.Df8 Kf5 (25) 0.1 >>> 3.00 0:00 +M48 1.Df8 Kf5 (43) 0.1 >>> 4.00 0:00 +M48 1.Df8 Kf5 (63) 0.2 >>>Bester Zug: Dh6-f8 Zeit: 0:00.321 min K/s: 262 Knoten: 82 TB: 141 >>> >>>Eduard
This page took 0.01 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.