Author: J.Dufek
Date: 01:39:07 10/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
Totaly out.
12...Bxd5 is _only_ real chance. Older 12...Bg7 13.Qh5 is very bad for black
(dont trust ChessInformant). Program was about 17-18 moves out of book with
evalution about = (homan not comps...)
On October 20, 2004 at 03:16:36, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>
>{ A crucial game from the Open Dutch CC Ch. }
>
>here my 2 cent.
>
>[Event "24th DOCC"]
>[Site "Leiden NED"]
>[Date "2004.10.17"]
>[Round "05"]
>[White "Pro Deo"]
>[Black "Chess Tiger"]
>[Result "1-0"]
>[ECO "B33"]
>[Opening "Sicilian: Sveshnikov variation"]
>
>1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5
>9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Nd5 f5 11.Bd3 Be6 12.O-O Bxd5 {I don't like this move. What about
>f4+Rg8 or Rc8+Rg8 and doing some attack too, but i guess both engines follow the
>book and cannot disagree to the moves of jeroen. Mainly this whole game is
>Jeroen beats Jeroen :-)) I looked this up, CT is of course in book here.}
>13.exd5 Ne7
>
>{from the beginning ProDeo had a very comfortable position.
>no castling of black. double pawn. no pieces developed. I guess this is at least
>+1 for white. Because of the Kings position b5 hangs. Hiarcs9 says +1,11 here !}
>
>14.Qh5 {very aggressive. others would have played Nxb5 and eaten the material. I
>guess this was played out of book ?! Yes. I looked at it. Book move.}
>e4
>15.Be2 Bg7 16.c3 {?! Rab1} O-O {If this is not book, it shows IMO the high
>King-safety terms in CT, why not b4 or Qc8 or any other move on the queen side
>taking advantage out of c3. But - i looked this up. CT IS in book here} 17.Nc2
>Qc8 18.Ne3 {HERE ProDeo is out of book and computes first time} f4 {here CT is
>IMO out of book and computes first time. Long time Qd7 ?! is preferred, i wonder
>how fast the Leiden machine is. My version will not play f4. } 19.Qg5 {although
>some moves were weird until here, white still has a good position. } fxe3
>20.Qxe7 b4
>21.fxe3 bxc3 22.Rac1 {DIAGRAM} Qe8 23.Qxe8 Rfxe8 24.bxc3 Bh6 {and ProDeo still
>ahead} 25.Kf2 Re5
>26.g4 Rxd5 27.Rfd1 Rxd1 28.Rxd1 Bf8 29.Rd4 {endgame position, still ProDeo
>better} a5 30.Rxe4 Bg7 31.Rc4 Rb8
>32.Rc6 Rb2 33.Rc8+ Bf8 34.a4 Ra2 35.Kf3 Rxa4 36.Bc4 h6 37.Rc7 Bg7 38.Bxf7+
>{DIAGRAM} Kf8 39.Bd5 Be5 40.Rf7+ Ke8 41.Rh7 Ra3 42.Rxh6 Rxc3 43.g5 Rc5
>44.Ke4 Rc1 45.Rh7 Rg1 46.Kf5 Rf1+ 47.Kg6 Rd1 48.e4 Rg1 49.h4 Kd8 50.Rf7 a4
>51.h5 Rg2 52.h6 a3 53.Rf5 Bd4 54.e5 a2 55.h7 Rh2 56.Rf8+ Ke7
>57.Rf7+ Kd8 58.Bxa2 Bxe5 59.Bd5 Ke8 60.Bc6+ 1-0
>
>i don't see how Tiger could have turned this.
>IMO the mistake was to let the BOOK ON . Why not play without book. CT would
>have had better chances.
>
>Its nonsense to play with a big book of writer JN against another big book of
>author JN. The result in the end is nearly random, depending in which book
>preparation line you land. Here it was -1 against Tiger. This makes no sense.
>
>the engines should IMO play themselves, and not lose a game due to a stupid book
>line.
>
>they can do IMO tournaments for book writers seperate, there the book writers
>can get their climax after such games :-)) but for a national championship i
>would wish the programmers or programs would learn that books are made to HELP
>and engine, not to decide games. the engine is the important thing, not the
>book.
>in this case the engine had almost no chance to stop the book line from running
>into a lost position. programmers should not follow book lines BLINDLY. they
>should let run the engine in the background and check if the book moves make
>sense. if e.g. the book move is 0.30 weaker then the move the engine choses, i
>would play out the engine move.
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.