Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:43:36 09/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 15, 2001 at 19:39:38, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On September 15, 2001 at 19:25:36, Uri Blass wrote: > >My guess would be that deep blue 1 (being hell slower than version >which played in 97) was simply getting at most 10 ply here. Then >it probably missed the tactical Bh5 there to be winning (note i find >it at 9 ply, fritz at 11, but probably my SE there is lucky >and i do not limit it bigtime like DB is known to have done it), >and it probably missed that after f3 e3 that this endgame with a piece >down is not a good plan to try. There is _another_ possibility. That your analysis is incorrect and f3 is actually _better_ than the pawn capture. > >So most likely its 10 ply search didn't reveal anything useful and because >of that it probably played f3. > >No superb search. In contradiction an INFERIOR search compared to nowadays >2001 programs. I wouldn't want to try diep 1996 though at this position, >i fear a problem then. It might play f3 for the same reason. > >I didn't have nullmove very well implemented back then, neitehr hashtables >were very well working back then. And i sure wouldn't search more than 8 >ply in 1997 WMCC at a PII300 with 66Mhz edoram most likely at this position, >so a 10 ply search in 1996 was in those days *real* deep. let's not forget >that. I got WITH nullmove and 32mb hashtables at a PII300 at the wmcc1996 >with a program WITH mobility and such inside its eval a search depth from >between 8 and 10 ply. Usually 8 ply at crucial positions. 10 ply when i >was kind of lucky with the bounds or in endgame or when it could think for >10 minutes. > >We must see things in clear perspective. > >Deep Blue 1 outsearched me bigtime. Deep Blue2 however searched perhaps >1 to 2 ply deeper than DB1. Tactical for sure better, because that 1 or 2 >ply more in the software search probably triggered quite some extensions. > >But if we compare it with today then both machines look pathetic of course, >just like my current diep version will look pathetic with diep 2005. > >>Deep Fritz at depth 14 after 1.f3 Bh5 >> >>New position >>8/p5pk/7p/3rq2b/3Npp2/PPQ2PP1/3R2KP/8 w - - 0 1 >> >>Analysis by Deep Fritz: >> >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxg3 >> µ (-0.91) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 107kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.h4 Qh2+ 5.Kf1 Qh3+ 6.Kf2 Bg6 7.Qf3 Qh2+ >> µ (-0.94) Depth: 7/21 00:00:00 218kN >>2.fxe4-- >> µ (-1.25) Depth: 8/24 00:00:00 422kN >>2.fxe4-- >> µ (-1.25) Depth: 8/27 00:00:00 488kN >>2.g4! >> µ (-1.22) Depth: 8/27 00:00:00 560kN >>2.g4-- >> -+ (-1.53) Depth: 9/21 00:00:01 1096kN >>2.g4-- e3 3.Rd1 Bg6 4.Kh3 Rxd4 5.Qxd4 e2 6.Qxe5 exd1Q >> -+ (-2.06) Depth: 9/25 00:00:01 1251kN >>2.fxe4! >> -+ (-2.03) Depth: 9/25 00:00:01 1387kN >>2.fxe4! Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.gxf4 Qxh2+ 5.Kf1 Qxf4+ 6.Kg1 Qg4+ 7.Kf2 >> -+ (-1.59) Depth: 9/27 00:00:02 1829kN >>2.gxf4! >> -+ (-1.56) Depth: 9/27 00:00:02 2186kN >>2.gxf4! Qxf4 3.Kg1 exf3 4.Kf1 Bg4 5.Qd3+ Kh8 6.Qc3 >> -+ (-1.53) Depth: 9/27 00:00:03 2370kN >>2.gxf4-- >> -+ (-1.84) Depth: 10/26 00:00:06 4523kN >>2.gxf4-- Qxf4 3.Kg1 Rd6 4.Rg2 Qf6 5.Rd2 Bxf3 6.Qe3 >> -+ (-1.87) Depth: 10/26 00:00:06 4815kN >>2.fxe4! >> -+ (-1.84) Depth: 10/30 00:00:07 5719kN >>2.g4! >> -+ (-1.81) Depth: 10/30 00:00:11 8482kN >>2.g4-- >> -+ (-2.12) Depth: 11/28 00:00:14 10717kN >>2.g4-- e3 3.Rd1 Bg6 4.Kh3 Rxd4 5.Rxd4 e2 6.Qe1 >> -+ (-2.31) Depth: 11/28 00:00:16 12074kN >>2.fxe4! >> -+ (-2.28) Depth: 11/31 00:00:18 13565kN >>2.fxe4 Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.Qd3+ Bg6 5.Qf3 Qxh2+ 6.Qg2 fxg3+ 7.Kf1 Rh5 >> -+ (-2.41) Depth: 12/35 00:00:46 33748kN >>2.g4! >> -+ (-2.37) Depth: 12/35 00:00:50 36499kN >>2.g4! e3 3.Rd1 Bg6 4.Kh3 Rxd4 >> -+ (-2.34) Depth: 12/35 00:00:52 37934kN >>2.g4-- >> -+ (-2.66) Depth: 13/32 00:01:24 61487kN >>2.g4-- e3 3.Rd1 Bf7 4.Qc2+ Bg6 5.Qc4 e2 6.Re1 Rxd4 7.Rxe2 Qd6 >> -+ (-2.72) Depth: 13/36 00:01:38 71530kN >>2.fxe4! >> -+ (-2.69) Depth: 13/37 00:02:11 95269kN >>2.fxe4! Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.Qd3+ Bg6 5.Qf3 Qxh2+ 6.Qg2 fxg3+ 7.Kf1 Rh5 >> -+ (-2.62) Depth: 13/38 00:02:38 114441kN >>2.fxe4-- >> -+ (-2.94) Depth: 14/39 00:04:44 204688kN >>2.fxe4-- Qxe4+ 3.Kf2 Qh1 4.Qd3+ Kh8 5.gxf4 Qxh2+ 6.Kf1 Qxf4+ 7.Ke1 Qh4+ >> -+ (-4.19) Depth: 14/41 00:09:44 406536kN >>2.gxf4! >> -+ (-4.16) Depth: 14/41 00:11:02 463509kN >>2.gxf4! Qxf4 3.Kf1 e3 4.Re2 Bxf3 5.Rxe3 Bh1+ 6.Nf3 Rf5 >> -+ (-3.62) Depth: 14/41 00:12:06 505085kN >>2.g4! >> -+ (-3.59) Depth: 14/41 00:12:20 514401kN >>2.g4! e3 3.Rd1 Bf7 4.b4 e2 5.Re1 Rxd4 6.Qc2+ >> -+ (-2.66) Depth: 14/41 00:13:25 557294kN >> >>(Blass, Tel-aviv 16.09.2001) >> >>The evidence suggests that Deep Fritz is going to find 1.f3 >>at depth 15. >> >>I do not say that the reasons are idntical to the reasons of >>Deep blue. >> >>Uri >> >>Uri
This page took 0 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.