Author: Keith Evans
Date: 17:01:38 05/25/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 25, 2004 at 16:45:37, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >On May 25, 2004 at 14:03:59, Matthew Hull wrote: > >>On May 25, 2004 at 13:41:34, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >> >>>On May 24, 2004 at 23:53:17, Keith Evans wrote: >>> >>>>On May 24, 2004 at 19:47:27, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 16:44:50, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 16:36:07, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 16:32:17, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 16:21:24, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 16:01:53, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 15:36:53, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>DIEP played two standard games against crafty yesterday on ICC with >>>>>>Vincent >>>>>>himself presiding (and pontificating). DIEP lost them both. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Oh, sir. Incredible, you were not interested in the games but you read >>all >>>>>>the >>>Vincent's messages.... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Interesting.... Could you comment what it really happened in such >>games in >>>>>>>>>detail? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I know the answer: No. :)))) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>[Event "ICS Rated Standard match"] >>>>>>>>>>[Site "ICC"] >>>>>>>>>>[Date "2004.05.24"] >>>>>>>>>>[Round "-"] >>>>>>>>>>[White "DIEP"] >>>>>>>>>>[Black "crafty"] >>>>>>>>>>[Result "0-1"] >>>>>>>>>>[WhiteElo "2540"] >>>>>>>>>>[BlackElo "2740"] >>>>>>>>>>[TimeControl "3600+30"] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 d5 3. Bg2 e6 4. O-O Be7 5. c4 O-O 6. b3 c5 7. e3 Nc6 >>8. >>>>>>>>Bb2 b6 9. Nc3 Bb7 10. cxd5 Nxd5 11. Nxd5 Qxd5 12. d4 Rad8 13. Ne5 >>Qd6 14. >>>>>>>>Nxc6 Bxc6 15. Qg4 cxd4 16. Bxd4 g6 17. Bxc6 Qxc6 18. Rac1 Qb7 >>19. Qf4 Rd6 >>>>>>>>20. Bb2 Rfd8 21. h4 Qa6 22. a4 Qe2 23. Bd4 f6 24. Rfe1 Qa2 >>25. Rc7 e5 26. >>>>>>>>Qe4 R6d7 27. Rxd7 Rxd7 28. Qc6 Rd8 29. Qe6+ Kf8 30. Bc3 >>Qc2 31. Qc4 a6 32. >>>>>>>>Re2 Qd3 33. Rd2 Qxc4 34. Rxd8+ Bxd8 35. bxc4 Ke7 36. >>e4 h5 37. Kf1 Kd6 38. >>>>>>>>Ke2 Kc5 39. Kd3 Bc7 40. f3 f5 41. Bd2 fxe4+ 42. >>fxe4 Bd6 43. Bc3 Bc7 44. >>>>>>>>Be1 Bd8 45. Bd2 Kc6 46. Bc3 Bc7 47. Kc2 Kd7 >>48. Kd2 Bd6 49. a5 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>49. a5?! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Unforced blunder, wouldn't you say? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>49. ... bxa5 50. >>>>>>>>>>Bxa5 Bc5 51. Ke2 Bd4 52. Kf3 Kc6 53. Bb4 Bb6 54. Bc3 Bc7 55. Ke3 a5 56. >>Kd3 >>>>>>>>a4 57. Bb2 Bd6 58. Kc2 Kd7 59. c5 Bxc5 60. Bxe5 Ke6 61. Bf4 Bd4 62. >>Kc1 Ke7 >>>>>>>>63. Kc2 Ke6 64. Kc1 Kd7 65. Kb1 Kc6 66. Ka2 Bg7 67. Ka3 Kc5 68. >>Kxa4 Kd4 >>>>>>>>69. Bg5 Kxe4 70. Kb3 Be5 71. Kc2 Bxg3 72. Kd1 Kf3 73. Bf6 Kg4 >>74. Ke2 Bxh4 >>>>>>>>75. Bd4 Kh3 76. Kf1 g5 77. Be5 g4 0-1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Finally, you post the games... Thanks. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>However, the blunder was pointed by Vincent. Could you offer us more >>>>>>details? >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Oh, you mean he told you an excuse? Why don't you enlighten us? If we >>only >>>>>>knew what the excuse was, we could change the result to 1-0. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>:) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I understand. You are not able to post more details about the opening or >>the >>>>>game itself. Again, you prove my point. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Details? Are not the moves before you? Can you not identify the opening? >>Can >>>>you not see the blunder? DIEP made one move that lost a drawn game. >>Simple. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>Of course, man. The opening is a double fianchetto. Simple. >>>>> >>>>>There are another doubtful move by Diep in the transition to the middle >>game: >>>19. Qf4?! Of course, you could not establish why. This is the hint for >>you. >> >>>>What's your point? >>>> >>>>Can you imagine what Vincent would have said if the PGN began: >>>> >>>>[White "crafty"] >>>>[Black "DIEP"] >>>> >>>>Nobody can ever really beat Diep. See: >>>>http://home.datawest.net/esn-recovery/artcls/socio.htm >>> >>>This is not the point. I would reask you: What is your point? >>> >>>My point is: He (Mathew) is not able to offer details about the game. That's >>>all. >> >> >>When one hears words like, "against crafty, a win is certain", and we see two >>losers in a row, the details hardly matter, unless one is searching for an >>excuse as to why the prophecy did not come true. >> >>Neither you nor an FM need my analysis to see where DIEP stumbled. This issue >>is about the braggart, the one who's talking all the trash and criticizing >>other people's honest work. He'd do better to focus on his own project's >>shortcomings rather than ripping other people's projects. > >If all the thread is about the moreal of Greenpeace, when I am interested in >Chess, why I should take are of your useless comments. > >I have insisted of discussing about the games and you have only avoid to debate >the point of view of chess. > >Conclusion: You are not able to detect if the games was chess or checkers or >perhaps, ludo. I saw where Diep failed but you are only focus on attacking the >chess author and not to discuss about the game. If you know something then you can educate us. But don't expect many people at CCC to spend effort to improve Diep.
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.