Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 09:34:36 06/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 23, 2005 at 06:52:39, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On June 23, 2005 at 04:03:49, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>On June 22, 2005 at 21:49:25, Robin Smith wrote: >> >>>On June 22, 2005 at 16:17:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On June 21, 2005 at 23:00:37, Robin Smith wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 18:36:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 16:44:21, Torstein Hall wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 15:30:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 14:19:44, Robin Smith wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 14:11:23, Mark Young wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 14:04:37, Ted Summers wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>To sum it up " He played a drawish opening in a tactic way. " Not a good idea >>>>>>>>>>>when computers are able to hang with the best and proving themself as better >>>>>>>>>>>than humans in open tactical positions. However I still think GM Adams can pull >>>>>>>>>>>it together and Win or Draw this match. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>[D] r2q1rk1/1pp3pp/p2b4/nP1p1p1b/2PPn3/3B1N1P/P1QN1PP1/1RB1R1K1 b - - 0 17 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Having reached this position, we seemed to be watching the beginning of the end >>>>>>>>>>>for Adams in the first game but hopefully not the match. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>C4! was a killer positional shot. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>c4 was a good move, but hardly a "killer". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>It seems clear GM Adams missed this move when he played Na5. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Perhaps Adams miissed it, but it hardly seems "clear", since Black is still OK >>>>>>>>>afterwards. His loss happened later. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>-Robin >>>>>>>>The problem here is that the kingside is already a bit open. One does _not_, as >>>>>>>>a human, allow the computer to open _both_ sides of the board in the same game. >>>>>>>>It invites a debacle such as this. Of course, he made a couple of tactical >>>>>>>>errors around the point where the rook on C8 was hanging, but he was already in >>>>>>>>the wrong kind of position... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>All the comps were suggesting the same moves as played by Hydra, so there was no >>>>>>>>real surprises from the white side, just black making an error here, an error >>>>>>>>there, before long he fell off the rim of the canyon. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>This is in my view far to general. Black was at least = uptil move 23.Be6 >>>>>>>[D]2rq1r1k/6pp/p2bB3/2p1Np1b/3Pn3/7P/P1Q2PP1/1RB1R1K1 b - - 0 23 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Define "equal". Here I am considering the important detail that white is a >>>>>>computer, black is a human. In that regard, black is _not_ equal up to move 23. >>>>> >>>>>By that logic Adams was already much worse after 1.e4 no matter what he did. >>>>>Let's face it, Hydra is stronger. Adams will probably be under presure in every >>>>>game where he has the black pieces. >>>>> >>>>>> In fact, I don't believe black is anywhere near equal. >>>>> >>>>>He is equal unless you use your "considering the important detail that white is >>>>>a computer" logic. >>>>> >>>>>>He isn't lost, but he is far from equal and is at best fighting for a draw. >>>>> >>>>>>But in an open position. >>>>>>And he just has no chance in that kind of position. >>>>> >>>>>He was under presure, yes. That is a far cry from "has no chance". >>>>> >>>>>>But I would take white anywhere along the way in that game, as a human playing >>>>>>another human. And by the way, any move after the "knight to the rim" move >>>>>>finds white better IMHO. >>>>> >>>>>Your opinion is wrong, unless perhaps you mean that white had a very slight >>>>>advantage. That is the norm in chess, by the way. >>>>> >>>>>>>Adams played 23...Rc7 while 23...cxd4 looks like it holds everything nicely >>>>>>>together. >>>>>> >>>>>>Doesn't quite hold everything nicely together. The comps were at about +1 here >>>>>>already, went to +1.5 on the Rc7 move. >>>>> >>>>>Maybe Craqfty sees +1, but the top programs don't see anything near +1 until >>>>>_after_ Rc7. Before Rc7 black was fine. >>>>> >>>>>>But then the next few moves were mostly >>>>>>bad by black, turning this into a debacle. But if there were not so many open >>>>>>files, open diagonals, etc, black wouldn't have had to be worrying about tactics >>>>>>all over the board. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> One line could be 23...cxd4 24.Qxc8 Qf6 25.Qc4 Qxe5 26.Qa5 and black >>>>>>>looks OK to me. >>>>>> >>>>>>But white looks better to me there. Maybe not "winning better" but >>>>>>"significantly better". >>>>> >>>>>Try "very slightly better". Adams played well until Rc7. Hydra is very strong >>>>>and kept putting the presure on and finally Adams made a mistake. >>>>> >>>>>-Robin >>>> >>>> >>>>Again, let me remind you that I qualified my response to "knowing this is a >>>>computer vs human, black is exposing himself to difficulty." >>> >>>That is _not_ what you said. If that _had_ been what you said I would have >>>agreed. But your original statements were stronger. Here are some actual quotes: >>> >>>Hyatt:"black making an error here, an error there" >>> >>>In chess terms he made his error on move 23, not "an error here, an error there" >>>before move 23. In anti-computer terms, by your logic he should never should >>>agreed to the match, since 1...e5 is the defense he knows best and no matter >>>what he does he will be playing into Hydra's strength (either the "open game" or >>>else openings Adams doesn't know as well as Hydra). >>> >>>Hyatt:"he just has no chance in that kind of position" >>> >>>This is silly. Of course he has a chance. The odds are against him, yes. The >>>odds are against him when he has black no matter _what_ opening he plays. But >>>Adams on a good day will find a way to hold 1...e5 against Hydra, even if/when >>>Hydra opens things up. >>> >>>Hyatt:"Doesn't quite hold everything nicely together. The comps were at about +1 >>>here already, went to +1.5 on the Rc7 move." >>> >>>No. Maybe Crafty said +1, but the _top_ programs say ~=. >>> >>>Hyatt:"If your strength is in the same area as your opponent, but his strength >>>in that area is much greater, only an idiot would stick with that plan" >>> >>>You're calling Adams an idiot? This is the kind of statement I find really >>>offensive. What arrogance!! >>> >>>>I'd be fairly happy with either side against an equal human opponent. But >>>>against a computer, I want things blocked, not open. e4 e5 is the wrong way to >>>>block things up. There are multiple options after e4 that avoid many of the >>>>wide-open king-pawn type positions... >>>> >>>>He's done the same thing again today. f4 was the move I would play as white, >>>>_unless_ I was playing a computer. Before I would play f4, I would have to be >>>>_certain_ that I can win from that point. I would not want to leave the >>>>computer playing on both sides of the board, with a pair of bishops, pair of >>>>rooks and a queen still on the board. >>> >>>Then how come he got a draw today? >>> >>>>So again, my comments were based not on pure chess, but on the opponent for >>>>Adams... >>> >>>I believe Adams knows better than anyone else on the planet in what openings he >>>does best against computers. I think it is highly arrogant when people suggest >>>otherwise. The fact that Adams is a 1...e5 player does not help him, I agree; >>>but if he starts switching openings he will also have trouble, since now he will >>>be playing a computer that knows the opening better than he does. >> >>Wrong >>A computer generally has no idea how to play certain openings. Hydra is clueless >>either. >>It is known that Hydra uses a relatively small book. It would be not a big >>problem to get it out of book early similiar to the Kasparov- Deep Junior match. >> >>I have beaten Shredder 9.02 running on a Dual Opteron with Black in 30 moves at >>the CSS freestyle online tourney. >>The opening was 1.e4 h6? >>Do you think I play 1...h6 against humans in OTB games? >> >>I don´t suggest Adams should play it, although it probably isn´t worse than 1.e4 >>e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 :) >> >>Michael >> >> > >Kasparov was also playing rather open chess in the matches with Junior and >Fritz. He tried to play semi-open positions. Positions with a fixed pawn structure. > >I remember game 4 with Fritz. The commentators were really worried that Kasparov >had played into an open position - the horror. Of course the game was easily >drawn. You can never completely avoid open positions. That´s not the point. You simply should avoid them whenever possible to increase your chances. >A lot of people here get hung up on this anti-comp stuff. The problem is you can >take yourself out of your normal game and really look like an idiot playing that >way. (See Kasparov-Deep Blue 2 for some examples.) Chess is going to have some >tactics. >Also keep in mind that many weaker players are happy to lose game after game >playing passively before finally drawing. Adams wouldn't be so happy with that. I don´t suggest to play passively at all, just to play solid. Certainly you have to go for counterplay if it is necessary. > >Basically there is a tricky balancing point. Yes, machines are better in open >positions. The question is, do you drop your main defense to 1. e4 because of >this? Adams thought not - and believe me, it's not because he doesn't know >anything about chess software :) Adams is clearly the worst "Anti-Computer" player amongst the top GMs I have seen so far. Michael > >Vas > >> >> >> _Either_ way >>>is an up-hill battle. Adams might try 1...c6, since he has played that on >>>occaision, but anything else is highly unlikely and computers can put some real >>>presure on in the Caro too. >>> >>>-Robin
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.