Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 23:41:02 04/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 02, 2000 at 03:34:11, blass uri wrote:
>On April 01, 2000 at 10:50:46, Harald Faber wrote:
>
>>On March 31, 2000 at 11:20:39, Shanti wrote:
>>
>>>Hi
>>>
>>>Shredder 4 - Fritz 6 0-1
>>>
>>>Shredder out-played Fritz 6 in the middle game and won a knight for a pawn. AT
>>>this point I left the hall while I was sure the game is over.
>>>When I returned Shredder was lost!!!! It seems that in the endgame (2R+N+pawns
>>>vs. 2R+pawns) Shredder went for Fritz king side pawns and let Fritz get 2
>>>passing pawns on the queen side.
>>
>>First I thought this is the losing position, where white plays Nf5 with rook
>>exchange but loss of the white a-pawn. But try against Tiger, it shows 41.Rb7!
>>This is a very fine move which keeps the advantage and cares for the connected
>>pawns. Main line is:
>>
>>41.Rb7 Ra2 42.Ng4! a5 43.h4! (creates a free pawn for white) gxh4 44.gxh4 e3
>>45.Nxe3 Ra4 46.Kg3 Ra1 47.h5 Rh1 48.Kg4 a4 49.Kg5 a3 50.Ra7 with a clearly won
>>position. After 12min Tiger changes to 50.Nf5 +7.xx.
>>It is probably worth trying the other top programs, I will try Rebel and Junior
>>on it.
>>
>>BTW I have some games too where Shredder already evaluates +6 or +7 and ends in
>>a draw, but these cases are rare.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Bye, Shanti
>>>
>>>[Event "?"]
>>>[Site "?"]
>>>[Date "2000.03.31"]
>>>[Round "7"]
>>>[White "Shredder 4"]
>>>[Black "Fritz 6"]
>>>[Result "0-1"]
>>>
>>>1. d4 {book 0s} Nf6 {20s} 2. c4 {book 0s} e6 {8s} 3. Nf3
>>>{book 0s} d5 {7s} 4. g3 {book 0s} dxc4 {7s} 5. Bg2 {book
>>>0s} Be7 {9s} 6. Nc3 {book 0s} O-O {14s} 7. Ne5 {book 0s} c5
>>>{10s} 8. dxc5 {book 0s} Qxd1+ {13s} 9. Nxd1 {book 0s} Bxc5
>>>{16s} 10. Nxc4 {book 0s} Nc6 {11s} 11. Bd2 {-0.08/12 4:08m}
>>>Bd7 {2:57m} 12. Rc1 {-0.16/12 2:44m} Be7 {4:07m (Rfd8)}
>>>13. Nc3 {-0.02/12 3:42m} Rfd8 {3:03m} 14. O-O {0.00/12 0s}
>>>e5 {4:58m (Rac8)} 15. Bg5 {+0.16/12 5:40m} h6 {7:29m (Be6)}
>>>16. Bxf6 {+0.31/11 44s} Bxf6 {45s} 17. Rfd1 {+0.33/12
>>>1:51m} Rab8 {5:07m (Be6)} 18. e3 {+0.50/13 3:46m} g6 {1:26m
>>>(Be6)} 19. b3 {+0.57/12 5:54m} Kg7 {2:44m (Be6)} 20. Nd5
>>>{+1.02/13 3:44m} Be6 {3:53m} 21. Nxf6 {+0.84/14 37s} Kxf6
>>>{2:03m (Rxd1+)} 22. Nd6 {+0.67/14 5:49m} Nb4 {15s} 23. a3
>>>{+0.88/13 3:30m} Na2 {6:13m (Nd5)} 24. Rc7 {+0.96/13 3:40m}
>>>b6 {14s} 25. Bf1 {+0.99/12 2:40m} Bxb3 {3:15m} 26. Rd3
>>>{+0.93/14 1:41m} Be6 {2:09m} 27. e4 {+1.28/14 3:27m} Rf8
>>>{20s} 28. Rf3+ {+1.90/14 1:27m} Kg7 {2:19m} 29. Bc4
>>>{+1.88/14 0s} Bxc4 {6:03m} 30. Rxc4 {+1.84/16 1:11m} Rbd8
>>>{7:02m} 31. Rd3 {+2.09/15 0s} f5 {4:41m (Kf6)} 32. Rc2
>>>{+2.67/15 4:43m} Kg8 {20s (fxe4)} 33. Rxa2 {+3.03/16 4:30m}
>>>fxe4 {11s} 34. Rdd2 {+3.01/15 3:55m} Rf3 {4:03m (a6)}
>>>35. Kg2 {+3.12/15 4:09m} g5 {10:43m} 36. a4 {+3.10/16 7s}
>>>Rb3 {3:34m (Rd3)} 37. Nf5 {+3.29/15 4:00m} Rxd2 {15s}
>>>38. Rxd2 {+3.32/12 1s} Ra3 {2:18m (Rb4)} 39. Rd7 {+3.47/15
>>>5:24m} Rxa4 {12s} 40. Nxh6+ {+4.13/17 6:30m} Kf8 {28s}
>>>41. Rf7+ {+4.20/15 1:05m} Ke8 {27s} 42. Rg7 {+4.33/15 53s}
>>>a5 {2:05m (e3)} 43. Rxg5 {+4.70/14 58s} Rc4 {1:26m}
>>>44. Rxe5+ {+4.93/13 9s} Kd7 {3:50m} 45. g4 {+5.45/14 0s} a4
>>>{8s} 46. Nf5 {+5.56/14 2:23m} a3 {34s} 47. Re7+ {+6.38/14
>>>1:07m} Kc6 {1:52m} 48. Ra7 {+6.32/15 1:13m} Rc3 {2:53m}
>>>49. h4 {+6.09/15 4:52m} b5 {3:25m} 50. Ne7+ {+6.07/13 0s}
>>>Kb6 {6:11m} 51. Nd5+ {+2.91/15 9:29m} Kxa7 {38s} 52. Nxc3
>>>{+0.77/15 28s} b4 {24s} 53. Nb5+ {+0.10/15 2:32m} Ka6 {19s
>>>(Kb6)} 54. Nd4 {+0.77/16 1:11m} a2 {15s} 55. Nb3 {+0.53/16
>>>52s} Kb5 {21s} 56. g5 {0.00/16 4:13m} Ka4 {35s (Kc4)}
>>>57. g6 {+0.04/14 1:17m} Kxb3 {17s} 58. g7 {+0.43/11 1:05m}
>>>a1=Q {2:57m} 59. g8=Q+ {0.00/13 0s} Kb2 {2:45m} 60. Qc4
>>>{+0.02/12 0s}
>
>This was the missing win blunder.
>
>Shredder could win by 60.Qh8+ Ka2 61.Qxa1+ Kxa1 62.h5 b3 63.h6 b2 64.h7 b1Q
>65.h8Q+ Qb2 66.Qa8+ Kb1 67.Qxe4+ and my thompson tablebases say +- for white in
>61 moves
>
>65...Ka2 66.Qa8+ Kb2 67.Qb8+ and 68.Qxb1+ Kxb1 69.Kf1 is also a win by nalimov
>tablebases.
>
>In the game after 60.Qc4 Fritz offered a draw and the operator of shredder
>refused because the evaluation was +0.02.
>
>Uri
It seems somewhat odd that the operator did not interpret that as a draw score.
Dave
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.