Author: Howard Exner
Date: 17:40:40 12/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 14, 1999 at 17:29:16, Ed Schröder wrote: >On December 14, 1999 at 17:12:13, John Warfield wrote: > >>On December 13, 1999 at 05:42:55, Ed Schröder wrote: >> >>>>Subject: Re: SSDF ratings are 100% accurate >>> >>>>Posted by John Warfield on December 12, 1999 at 20:36:17: >>> >>>>>>Now I am beginning to see that SSDF ratings do not reflect performance against >>>>>>humans period. Going back to my example, program B could actually be weaker >>>>>>than program A against GMs, even though it is 50 points stronger in SSDF comp >>>>>>vs. com testing. >>>>>> >>>>>>I guess this is what Ed Schroder has been saying all along about Rebel. I >>>>>>need to think about this for a while. >>>>> >>>>>The MAIN difference I noticed: in comp-comp both programs (in many cases) >>>>>can afford (multiple) small to big positional mistakes. Try this against >>>>>a GM, one little mistake and you lose. The REBEL-HOFFMAN game was a >>>>>perfect example of this. >>>>> >>>>>Ed >>>> >>>> >>>> The rebel hoffman game was lost because rebel crashed remember? >>> >>>Of course I remember. But in the meantime I have changed my mind. Rebel due >>>to the hardware problems used about 50-60% of its time also 2 horrible moves >>>were played (one with a +2.xx) score that couldn't be reproduced. This made me >>>decide the game was worthless. >>> >>>But after going through the game again and again my conclusion is different now. >>>Rebel didn't understand the opening, played a few inferior moves and technically >>>the game was over after move 18. Note that Rebel was in book till move 15! >>> >>>I think that's all there is to say about this game. The hardware problems came >>>after the 2 inferior moves (16.Qc1 and 18.a4) and GM Hoffman did not let Rebel >>>go. In comp-comp however you still would have good chances to win the game >>>(note that after 18.a4 Rebel is still a pawn up) as the opening was very >>>strategic by nature an area computers are still weak. >>> >>>Just try any chess program that gives you a positive score for black after 18.a4 >>>and if it does buy it by all means :-) >>> >>>Or take 2 (or more) good chess programs and let them continue after 18.a4 and >>>I am pretty sure white's total game score will be over 50%. >>> >>>This is what I got as a comment from GM Hoffman about the game: >>> >>>[ begin ] >>> >>>I think it was a very interesting game for black,with 15... Rb7 an interesting >>>novelty.16. Qc1 means that Rebel doesn't understand the position (16.Rc1 >>>was normal plan). >>> >>>I think it is very hard to a computer to know the difference between to have >>>material plus and the strategical compensation for the pawn. That's because >>>I choice the Volga Gambit. That you must think how to improve for a high level >>>program. >>> >>>[ end ] >>> >> >> >> >>>Rebel was caught on a weak point of its opening book. Very clever and an >>>instructive experience. >> >> >> Ok well that's be clear about this issue Ed, then it was the Rebel book that >>lost the game, and not the Rebel Engine!! Whoever created the Rebel MVS needs >>some chastisement! Just Joking, I realize that a grandmaster will always find >>some king of whole in a opening book, but still somehow I don't want to blame >>rebel for the lost. > >Disagree. Rebel did not understand the opening played 2 inferior moves >and lost because of that. The book-line itself was ok. I assume not >every GM plays the King Gambit perfectly and may got caught because of >that. > >Ed Even with Rebel not understanding the opening plus the hardware failures I often wondered if at move 35 Rebel could have played more actively. Instead of the timid Kh1 perhaps Qg4 would have been played by a healthy Rebel. This kind of move makes black's choice of a follow up plan more difficult than the actual game where Hoffman transfered his rook via b8 to h8. Did Hoffman comment on a possible Qg4 here? 8/2n1pk2/3p1pp1/2pP4/Pr1qP3/2N4P/1P2QRK1/8 w - - id Rebel Century - GM A. Hoffman;
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.