Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:09:16 10/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 27, 2003 at 10:57:41, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>On October 27, 2003 at 10:49:42, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On October 27, 2003 at 10:30:58, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On October 27, 2003 at 10:23:32, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>
>>>Find the difference in book:
>>>
>>>[Event "23rd DOCC"]
>>>[Site "Leiden NED"]
>>>[Date "2003.10.18"]
>>>[Round "01"]
>>>White: NOOMEN BOOK (rebel)
>>>[Black "Ant"]
>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>
>>>1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Bd3 Be7 6.Nf3 Ngf6 7.Nxf6+ Nxf6
>>>8.Qe2 Bd7 9.O-O O-O 10.Ne5 Ba4 11.b3 Be8 12.Rd1 Qd6 13.a4 {DIAGRAM} a5
>>>14.Qf3 c6 15.Qh3 Qd8 16.Bg5 h6 17.Bxh6 Bd7 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.Qg3+ 1-0
>>>
>>>[Event "23rd DOCC"]
>>>[Site "Leiden NED"]
>>>[Date "2003.10.26"]
>>>[Round "10"]
>>>White: NOOMEN BOOK (sjeng)
>>>[Black "Ant"]
>>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>>
>>>1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bg5 c6 6.e3 Bf5 7.Qf3 Bg6
>>>8.Bxf6 Qxf6 9.Qxf6 gxf6 10.Nf3 Bb4 11.Rd1 Nd7 12.a3 Bxc3+ 13.bxc3 Bh5
>>>14.Rb1 Bxf3 15.gxf3 b5 16.Bd3 Ke7 17.Rg1 Ke6 18.Rg3 h6 19.e4 a6 20.Kd2 Nb6
>>>21.Re1 Kd6 22.Rg7 Ra7 23.Rg4 h5 24.Rf4 Nd7 25.Rg1 Rh6 26.Rg3 Nb6 27.Rg8 Ra8
>>>28.Rxa8 Nxa8 29.Ke3 Nc7 30.Bc2 Ne6 31.Rh4 Rh8 32.Bd1 Ng7 33.Bb3 a5
>>>34.Bc2 Rh6 35.Rh3 h4 36.Bd3 Rh5 37.Be2 Rh8 38.Bd1 a4 39.Be2 f5
>>>40.e5+ Ke7 41.f4 Ne8 42.Kd2 Nc7 43.Kd3 Ne6 44.Rf3 Rg8 45.Kc2 Rg2 46.h3 Nf8
>>>47.Bf1 Rg1 48.Bd3 Ke6 49.Kb2 Ng6 50.Bc2 Re1 51.Bb1 Re2+ 52.Bc2 f6
>>>53.Kb1 Re1+ 54.Kb2 Ne7 55.Bb1 Rf1 56.Bd3 Rh1 57.Re3 Rg1 58.Bb1 Rf1
>>>59.Rf3 Ng6 60.Bd3 Rd1 61.Kc2 Re1 62.Kb2 Rg1 63.Ka2 Rd1 64.Bc2 Rh1
>>>65.Kb2 Ne7 66.Ka2 Rg1 67.Re3 Ng6 68.Rf3 Rc1 69.Kb2 Rg1 70.Ka2 Nh8
>>>71.Bd3 Rd1 72.Bc2 Re1 73.Bd3 Nf7 74.Kb2 Rg1 75.Kc2 Ra1 76.Kb2 Rd1
>>>77.Kc2 Rh1 78.Kb2 Nh8 79.Bc2 Rh2 80.Kc1 Rg2 81.Kd2 Rg1 82.Bd1 Ng6
>>>83.Kc2 Re1 84.Re3 Rh1 85.Rf3 c5 86.Kd2 c4 87.exf6 Kxf6 88.Kc2 Nf8
>>>89.Re3 Ne6 90.Bf3 Rh2 91.Bxd5 Nxf4 92.Bc6 Rxf2+ 93.Kc1 Nd3+ 94.Kd1 b4
>>>95.cxb4 Ra2 96.b5 Rxa3 97.b6 Nf2+ 98.Ke2 Ra2+ 99.Kf1 Rb2 100.Bxa4 Ne4
>>>101.Bc6 Ng3+ 102.Ke1 Rxb6 103.Bd5 Rb1+ 104.Kf2 Rf1+ 105.Kg2 Rd1
>>>106.Bxc4 Rxd4 107.Re6+ Kg5 108.Ba6 Nh5 109.Re3 Rd2+ 110.Kg1 Nf4 111.Bf1 Kf6
>>>112.Re8 Ng6 113.Rc8 f4 114.Bg2 Rb2 115.Be4 Ne7 116.Rh8 Ke5 117.Ba8 Ng6
>>>118.Rh5+ Kd4 119.Rh6 Rb6 120.Kf2 Rf6 121.Bf3 Re6 122.Bd1 Ke5
>>>123.Bc2 Ne7 124.Rh5+ Kd6 125.Rxh4 Ke5 126.Kf3 Rc6 127.Rh5+ Kd4 128.Be4 Re6
>>>129.Ra5 Rh6 130.Kxf4 Rxh3 1/2-1/2
>>>
>>>No one can explain to me that 1.e4 in round 10 with the same book and similar
>>>bookline would have won there.
>>>
>>>This where Noomen when he sees a line that can win potentially against a
>>>program, he is taking 10 minutes effort to modify the books short before the
>>>game, also against for example DIEP.
>>>
>>>DIEP-Sjeng
>>>[Event "23rd DOCC"]
>>>[Site "Leiden NED"]
>>>[Date "2003.10.19"]
>>>[Round "04"]
>>>[White "Diep"]
>>>[Black "Deep Sjeng"]
>>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>>[Opening "D07 QGD: Chigorin Defense"]
>>>
>>>1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.d5 Ne5 5.Qd4 Ng6 6.e4 e5 7.Qxc4 Bd6
>>>8.Qa4+ Bd7 9.Bb5 Nf6 10.Nf3 O-O 11.Bxd7 Qxd7 12.Qxd7 Nxd7 13.Be3 Nb6
>>>14.Nd2 f5 15.O-O Nf4 16.Rfd1 Rad8 17.Nb5 Na4 18.Rab1 a6 19.Nxd6 cxd6
>>>20.Nf3 Rc8 21.Rd2 Rf6 22.g3 Nh5 23.exf5 Rxf5 {DIAGRAM} 24.Ng5 Nf6 25.Ne6 h6
>>>26.h3 e4 27.Rbd1 Kf7 28.g4 Rxd5 29.Rxd5 Nxd5 30.Ng5+ hxg5 31.Rxd5 Nxb2
>>>32.Rxd6 Nc4 33.Rd7+ Kg8 34.Bd4 Nd2 35.Bb2 Nf3+ 36.Kg2 b5 37.Rxg7+ Kf8
>>>38.Ra7 Rc6 39.Ba3+ Kg8 40.Kg3 Nh4 41.Bb2 Rc2 42.Rg7+ Kf8 43.Rxg5 Rxb2
>>>44.Kxh4 Rxf2 45.a3 Ra2 46.Rf5+ Kg7 47.Re5 Rxa3 48.Rxe4 a5 49.Re7+ Kf8
>>>50.Rb7 Rb3 51.Kg5 a4 52.Kf6 Rf3+ 1/2-1/2
>>>
>>>Noomen sees this line against diep and loudly says he finds it a great line for
>>>black, because white has played a nonsense move Qa4 (according to Noomen).
>>>
>>>He knows that i haven't modified book of course. Then some hours later there is
>>>the game DIEP-Rebel.
>>
>>How can he know that you did not change the book?
>
>he was no further than 5 meters distance from me in those few hours.
>
>Mostly 1 or 2.
>
>>He also cannot know that your book is so small to have only 1.d4(you do not try
>>to surprise him by 1.c4
>
>Checkout the openings diep played the last 4 tournaments the first move.
>He is no fool in contradiction to you.
I am not fool.
You are fool if you play the same opening in every game in an important
tournament.
<snipped>
>>>So he plays same opening again, of course which is legal though i didn't find it
>>>very sportive because he knew i had not modified book and he did effort short
>>>before game to select the book he had delivered to Sjeng. I found that out of
>>>course during the game.
>>
>>I see nothing wrong with what he did.
>
>That's because you still do not understand statistics despite studying it and
>promoting onto them.
>
>If statistics say 1.e4 1-0
>
>so that is 100% score out of 1.e4 in a very easy way. Just 19 moves.
Only if ant plays the same way.
A week is a lot of time to prepare and I can be almost sure that ant planned to
avoid losing in the same way.
>
>Then every mathematician except you should understand that you go a week later
>against ANT again 1.e4
>
>Do you?
No
I do not know if sjeng has better chances with 1.e4
The only way to know is by testing and I did not test it.
>
>If answer = no, then i do not see you as a mathematician, but some failed
>researcher who is more stubborn than his toe.
I have a ph.d from tel-aviv university that is practically in mathematics.
Formally it is not in mathematics but it is only because of the fact that the
proffesor my guide(simon litsyn) is from the faculty of engineering.
Uri
This page took 0.03 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.