Author: Jonas Cohonas
Date: 18:02:57 11/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 2001 at 20:35:54, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>On November 08, 2001 at 08:22:11, Jonas Cohonas wrote:
>
>A00 is the eco code here :)
>
>>On November 08, 2001 at 08:10:12, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On November 08, 2001 at 08:01:39, Jonas Cohonas wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 08, 2001 at 07:40:57, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On November 08, 2001 at 06:35:18, Jonas Cohonas wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Sure if there is a prize fund i'll join.
>>>>>
>>>>>I usually go for the draw. then the thing wants to win, and i
>>>>>finish it. i need to know the name of my opponent of course,
>>>>>otherwise it's not fair.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Can anyone here beat the "best" prog in 40/120 without using anti comp
>>>>>>strtegies? on atleast an Athlon 1000?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I have seen a lot of post where people draw the comps when trying to do nothing
>>>>>>but that, but i am yet to see someone not using anti comp strategies beat them
>>>>>>in a 40/120 on fast hardware..... anyone up for the challenge?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards
>>>>>>Jonas
>>>>
>>>>The prize would be the reward of beating a prog under these conditions:
>>>>No anti comp play, 40/120 on fast hardware.
>>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>>Jonas
>>>
>>>First define anti computer play. i play awfully passive usually.
>>>i usually get closed positions and i hope my opponent fakes out and
>>>panics and exchanges my bad bishop for his active knight.
>>>
>>>that's not anti-computer play right?
>>>
>>>I'm 2312 and FM. So it's kind of unfair to say: 'you must play a tactical
>>>game against the computer'.
>>>
>>>Let me show you a game i played on USCL where i won from
>>>crafty. Is this anti-computer play?
>>>
>>>Because if you decide it's not, then any way of fighting the machine
>>>is allowed of course.
>>>
>>>Of course i prefer to take it out of book at move 3 or so. I'm not going
>>>to fight an opponent with mainlines. I never do!
>>>
>>>Auch no search command at uscl. duh.
>>>
>>>let me seek in my email box. here it is:
>>>
>>>MiChiDa (2471) vs. Diepeveen (2339) --- Wed Oct 17, 08:55 EDT 2001
>>>Rated standard match, initial time: 15 minutes, increment: 15 seconds.
>>>
>>>Move MiChiDa Diepeveen
>>>---- --------------------- ---------------------
>>> 1. Na3 (0:00.000) e5 (0:00.000)
>>> 2. c4 (0:00.020) c5 (0:18.750)
>>> 3. e4 (1:00.014) Nc6 (0:05.047)
>>> 4. d3 (0:43.225) Bd6 (0:07.812)
>>> 5. Nf3 (0:40.541) Nge7 (0:05.828)
>>> 6. Nb5 (0:56.346) Bc7 (0:02.640)
>>> 7. Bd2 (0:35.324) a6 (0:10.297)
>>> 8. Nxc7+ (0:37.988) Qxc7 (0:02.891)
>>> 9. Be2 (0:33.356) O-O (0:03.719)
>>> 10. O-O (0:33.453) d6 (0:09.140)
>>> 11. h3 (0:27.299) b5 (0:29.969)
>>> 12. cxb5 (0:37.433) axb5 (0:02.406)
>>> 13. Qc2 (0:31.948) b4 (0:07.828)
>>> 14. a4 (0:12.717) h6 (3:16.703)
>>> 15. b3 (0:35.537) Be6 (0:05.796)
>>> 16. Rfb1 (0:36.684) f5 (0:04.843)
>>> 17. Rb2 (0:33.950) f4 (0:26.313)
>>> 18. Re1 (0:35.555) Qd7 (0:06.704)
>>> 19. Rbb1 (0:32.430) Kh8 (0:46.828)
>>> 20. Bd1 (0:33.157) g5 (0:03.860)
>>> 21. Rf1 (0:11.823) Rf6 (1:38.594)
>>> 22. Nh2 (0:31.984) Nd4 (0:03.516)
>>> 23. Qa2 (0:27.016) f3 (0:07.828)
>>> 24. Nxf3 (0:31.451) Nxf3+ (0:36.844)
>>> 25. Bxf3 (0:00.897) Rxf3 (0:18.719)
>>> 26. gxf3 (0:30.771) Ng6 (0:15.203)
>>> 27. f4 (0:55.107) Bxh3 (0:21.359)
>>> 28. f5 (0:00.995) Nf4 (0:34.688)
>>> 29. Rfd1 (0:29.329) Qf7 (0:33.828)
>>> 30. f3 (1:46.091) Qh5 (0:18.687)
>>> 31. Bxf4 (0:40.128) gxf4 (0:04.359)
>>> 32. Kf2 (0:06.505) Bg2 (1:16.469)
>>> 33. Ke1 (0:00.990) Bxf3 (0:10.703)
>>> 34. Qf2 (0:00.975) Rg8 (0:16.594)
>>> 35. Kd2 (0:00.630) Rg2 (0:02.906)
>>> 36. Qxg2 (0:14.608) Bxg2 (0:08.734)
>>> 37. Kc2 (0:04.144) f3 (0:01.328)
>>> 38. Rd2 (0:10.895) Qh4 (0:45.953)
>>> 39. a5 (0:29.094) f2 (0:45.813)
>>> 40. a6 (0:28.108) f1=Q (0:05.485)
>>> 41. Rxf1 (0:20.223) Bxf1 (0:01.688)
>>> 42. a7 (0:07.853) Qd8 (0:01.734)
>>> 43. Rh2 (0:09.275) Qa8 (0:59.906)
>>> 44. Rxh6+ (0:27.769) Kg7 (0:02.750)
>>> 45. Rg6+ (1:03.956) Kh7 (0:02.078)
>>> 46. Rg1 (0:33.690) Qxa7 (0:02.359)
>>> 47. Rxf1 (0:25.220) Qa2+ (0:02.562)
>>> 48. Kd1 (0:01.607) Qxb3+ (0:02.016)
>>> 49. Ke2 (0:01.733) Kg7 (0:06.750)
>>> 50. Rg1+ (0:11.371) Kf7 (0:04.563)
>>> 51. Rh1 (0:02.393) Qb2+ (0:07.937)
>>> 52. Ke3 (0:02.656) Qd4+ (0:01.391)
>>> 53. Ke2 (0:21.230) c4 (0:01.266)
>>> 54. Rh7+ (0:28.447) Kg8 (0:01.875)
>>> 55. Rh3 (0:10.164) cxd3+ (0:01.531)
>>> {White resigned} 0-1
>>
>>Anti comp play would be IMO: seeking to find an opening line where the comp does
>>not understand squat, just for the sake of taking advantage of that.
>>A fair way of avioding anti comp play would be to, choose a mainline that gives
>>you or the comp a + or - 0.10 (preferebly an equal score) score, and proceed
>>from there, just like in human v human games, black seek to equalize the
>>position and white tries to build on his minimal advantage of making the first
>>move.
>>If the mainline is 2,3,4 or 5 moves is irellevant just as long as you play a
>>line that is concidered to be equal (still give or take) to make sure there are
>>no anti comp strtegies involved. And the mainline would have to have an ECO
>>code!
>>
>>Regards
>>Jonas
:)
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.