Author: blass uri
Date: 03:11:03 07/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2000 at 03:25:53, Ed Schröder wrote: >On July 07, 2000 at 20:35:17, Amir Ban wrote: > >>On July 07, 2000 at 14:52:29, Francesco Di Tolla wrote: >> >>>[Event "Dortmund Super"] >>>[Site "Dortmund"] >>>[Date "2000.07.07"] >>>[Round "1"] >>>[White "Bareev"] >>>[Black "DeepJunior 6"] >>>[Result "1/2-1/2"] >>> >>>1. c4 e6 2. Nc3 d5 3. d4 c6 4. e3 Nf6 5. b3 Nbd7 6. Bb2 Bd6 7. Nf3 O-O 8. >>>Bd3 Qe7 9. O-O e5 10. Be2 e4 11. Nd2 a6 12. cxd5 cxd5 13. b4 Bxb4 14. Qb3 >>>Nb8 15. Na4 Qd6 16. Rfd1 Nc6 17. Bc3 Bxc3 18. Qxc3 Bg4 19. Bxg4 Nxg4 20. >>>Nf1 b5 21. Nc5 Rfc8 22. Rdc1 h5 23. Rc2 Nf6 24. Rac1 Ne8 25. a4 b4 26. Qe1 >>>h4 27. h3 Qh6 28. Nb3 Rc7 29. Qe2 Raa7 30. Qg4 Kf8 31. Nfd2 Ne7 32. Rxc7 >>>Rxc7 33. Nc5 Ra7 34. Ndb3 Kg8 35. Qe2 Nc7 36. a5 Nb5 37. Qd2 Nc6 38. Na4 >>>Qf6 39. Rc5 Rc7 40. Qe2 g6 41. Qc2 Kg7 42. Qe2 Kh8 43. Qc2 Qd6 44. Qe2 f5 >>>45. Qd1 Kh7 46. Qe2 Rf7 47. f4 exf3 48. Qxf3 Ne7 49. Qf4 Qxf4 50. exf4 Rf6 >>>51. Nb6 Rd6 52. Kf2 Kh6 53. Nc8 Nxc8 54. Rxc8 Kg7 55. Ke3 Re6+ 56. Kd3 Re1 >>>57. Rc1 Rxc1 58. Nxc1 Kf6 59. Na2 b3 60. Nb4 Ke6 61. Nxa6 Kd6 62. Nb4 Nxd4 >>>63. Kc3 Ne2+ 64. Kxb3 Nxf4 65. a6 Kc7 66. Kc3 g5 67. Kd4 g4 68. Kc5 d4 69. >>>Kxd4 Nxg2 70. Nd3 gxh3 71. Nf2 h2 72. Ke5 f4 73. Ke4 Kb6 >>>1/2-1/2 >> >>Some comments from Dortmund: >> >>The game lasted 6.5 hours, ending two hours after all the other games. We ran >>into Bareev and Kramnik later on a Dortmund street. Bareev admitted says he's >>dead tired. >> >>Bareev thinks 68... d4 is a mistake and that 68... Kb8 instead wins. >> >>I asked him why 13. b4. He said "to confuse the computer". He overlooked and was >>impressed by 14...Nb8. Boris Alterman thinks b4 is nonsense and doesn't >>understand what's wrong with simpler answers like 14... Nb6 or 14... Rd8. >> >>The score was a roller-coaster in the later part of the game. Junior thought >>that 56...Re1 is winning, then it failed low, but either there was nothing >>better or timeout occurred. Later it seemed to work out anyway to a won knight >>endgame, but the result was a draw. >> >>The game was in Bareev's typical style: all positional, no tactics whatever. He >>defended very accurately in the end (but 55.Ke3 doesn't look right). >> >>Interesting comment: Bareev thought the computer was clearly excellent in >>strategics but not so good in tactics ! Kramnik also joined in the opinion that >>computers miss many tactics. >> >>Something to think about. >> >>Tomorrow Huebner. Sunday Adams. >> >>By the way, Junior needs 3 points to make the first computer GM norm ever. >> >>Amir > >Hi Amir, > >[d]6k1/2r2p2/p1n2qp1/PnRp4/Np1Pp2p/1N2P2P/2Q2PP1/6K1 b - - > >I don't understand 41..Kg7 as it allows 42.Nb6 (not played by Bareev). >IMO after 42.Nb6 it is white having the better position after all the >exchanges. > >Rebel analysis: > >41..Kg7 (-0.56) 14 plies >41..Qd6 (+0.74) 14 plies > >I can't explain the 1.30 difference. What do I miss? Did Junior see >something very deep or does Rebel and Junior have a total different >evaluation here. > >Ed Another possibility is that there is a bug in Junior Junior5.9's evaluation at depth 18 from white's point of view. after 41...Qd6 (-0.51) after 41...Kg7 42.Nb6(+0.18) Uri
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.