Author: Djordje Vidanovic
Date: 18:24:13 11/11/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 11, 2005 at 18:37:34, Marc Lacrosse wrote: >On November 11, 2005 at 17:13:26, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>On November 11, 2005 at 16:51:39, Theo van der Storm wrote: >> >>>[Event "25th DOCC"] >>>[Site "Leiden NED"] >>>[Date "2005.11.11"] >>>[Round "3"] >>>[White "Fruit"] >>>[Black "Diep"] >>>[Result "0-1"] >>>[ECO "B90"] >>> >>>1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 d6 3. Nge2 Nf6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 a6 6. Be3 e5 7. Nb3 Be6 8. f3 >>>Nbd7 9. g4 b5 10. g5 b4 11. Nd5 Nxd5 12. exd5 Bf5 13. Bd3 Bxd3 14. Qxd3 Be7 15. >>>Rg1 O-O 16. O-O-O a5 17. Nd2 a4 18. Ne4 Qc7 19. h4 b3 20. axb3 axb3 21. Qxb3 >>>Rfb8 22. Qc3 Qb7 23. b3 Rc8 24. Qb2 Nb6 25. Bxb6 Qxb6 26. Rge1 Ra5 27. Kb1 Qa7 >>>28. c4 Ra8 29. Nc3 f5 30. f4 e4 31. Re2 Bd8 32. Nb5 Qa6 33. Nc3 h5 34. Na4 Rb8 >>>35. Nc3 Bb6 36. Nb5 Ra8 37. Nc3 Ra3 38. Kc2 Qa5 39. Ree1 Bf2 40. Rf1 Bc5 41. >>>Rh1 Bb4 42. Na4 Qa7 43. c5 Bxc5 44. Ra1 Rxa1 45. Qxa1 Bd4 46. Qa2 Qb7 0-1 >>> >> >>Nc3-Nb5-Nc3 - really stupid play by Fruit. :-( >> >>Joachim > > >The problem is not 35.Nc3 36.Nb5 37.Nc3, Joachim. > >The problem is that sicilian structures with d6-e5 by black and 0-0-0 by white >are played extremely weakly by Fruit in quite a few sublines. >This is the second loss of Fruit against Diep (out of two competition games!) >due to inappropriate opening choice by Fruit's book cooker, leading to >objectively satisfying positions that Fruit plays badly and thus to subsequent >disaster. >First time I was the cooker, this time Jeroen is to be blamed. > >This leads me to three comments. > >1. Congratulations to Vincent Diepeveen and to its opening advisors. > >2. There are terrible weaknesses in Fruit's evaluation of quite a few early >middle game structures (and this complements other kinds of positions of which >Fruit has a really outstanding "understanding"). Thus Fruit is not able to play >anything and it is still terribly difficult to build a weakness-free competition >book for it. > >3. Improving early middle game evaluation and planning should be given a much >higher priority if Fabien intends to compete in tournaments like the dutch open. >It is really incredible that the evaluation function of the competition >"x-fruit" is still close to the publicly released one two months after release >when engaging in such a tournament : all opponents have had all opportunities to >test fruit's weaknesses. If tablebase implementation was such a commercial >priority that any other development had to be stopped, then a logical >consequence was to withdraw from any public competition until a new fruit could >be produced with an improved evaluation. See what happened to shredder a few >months ago. All opponents had tested their repertoire against the publicly >available shredder 9. >Deep shredder suffered more than one severe losses in Reykjavik. >Fruit's fate will be the same in the following months if fabien continues to >lose his time in bug-checking chessbase-gui or implementing tablebase or other >marginally important features. >Aside of tablebases, if other questionable improvements are commercial >priorities , then stopping to play in public tournaments for a while is >mandatory IMHO. > >Marc Marc, I couldn't agree more with your brief analysis. However, a bitter pill is sometimes needed for progress to be made. Let's hope for a better streak in this tournament. Regardless, your comments sound to the point to me. Djordje
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.