Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Analysing old master games with today's programs

Author: Chessfun

Date: 12:53:14 08/09/00

Go up one level in this thread


On August 09, 2000 at 15:11:20, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On August 09, 2000 at 02:28:25, Mark Young wrote:
>
>>On August 08, 2000 at 17:37:44, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On August 08, 2000 at 16:29:59, walter irvin wrote:
>>>
>>>>On August 08, 2000 at 10:33:34, Peter Hegger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hello,
>>>>>This has probably been done to a certain extent already. I'm wondering how the
>>>>>games of the old masters, i.e. Morphy, Steinitz, Tarrasch etc...stand up under
>>>>>the scrutiny of today's best computers. Are the games still as clean and
>>>>>brilliant as they seemed to be a hundred years ago? Or have they been found to
>>>>>be error ridden relics of days gone by?
>>>>>I'm wondering in particular about the "evergreen"  and the "immortal" games.
>>>>>Also, Bobby Fischer's "game of the century" against Byrne.
>>>>>Thanks for any help you can give me.
>>>>>Best Regards,
>>>>>Peter
>>>> i think you will find that the computer almost always out does the master in
>>>>key positions .computers crush just about all players in tactics .
>>>
>>>I disagree.
>>>They are better in short tactics but humans are better in long tactics.
>>>
>>> i guess the
>>>>the big question is could the computer reach a key position vs morphy ect
>>>>??????????? i think there are some old masters that had styles that a computer
>>>>just could not deal with 2 that come to mind are nimzovitch and petrosian .they
>>>>were masters of the closed position game .i think they would have laughed at
>>>>computers .on the other hand tactical masters like marshal morphy ect would have
>>>>got sliced and diced .
>>>
>>>Here is one winning moves of morphy
>>>
>>>[D]r1bq1rk1/ppp3p1/7p/3P2n1/2PQ1p2/1N5P/PPP2PPK/R1B2R2 b - - 0 1
>>>
>>>Morphy won by Nf3+
>>>programs need a long time to find this move because they cannot see deep enough.
>>
>>This position is right up Fritz 6a's power alley, it was able to find Nf3+ in
>>less then 1 min.
>>
>>
>>New position
>>r1bq1rk1/ppp3p1/7p/3P2n1/2PQ1p2/1N5P/PPP2PPK/R1B2R2 b - - 0 1
>>
>>Analysis by Fritz 6:
>>
>>1...Bxh3
>>  +-  (3.06)   depth: 1/3   00:00:00
>>1...Bxh3 2.gxh3
>>  +-  (3.53)   depth: 1/3   00:00:00
>>1...f3
>>  +-  (2.91)   depth: 1/5   00:00:00
>>1...f3
>>  ±  (1.37)   depth: 1/5   00:00:00
>>1...f3 2.Bxg5 Qxg5
>>  ±  (1.37)   depth: 2/8   00:00:00
>>1...f3 2.Bxg5 Qxg5 3.g3
>>  ±  (1.22)   depth: 3/12   00:00:00
>>1...f3 2.Bxg5 Qxg5 3.Rg1 fxg2 4.Rxg2
>>  ±  (1.19)   depth: 4/12   00:00:00  2kN
>>1...f3 2.Bxg5 Qxg5 3.Rg1 Qf5 4.Qc3 fxg2 5.Rxg2
>>  ±  (1.31)   depth: 5/21   00:00:00  13kN
>>1...f3 2.Bxg5 Qxg5 3.Rg1 Qf5 4.Qc3 fxg2 5.Rxg2
>>  ±  (1.31)   depth: 6/20   00:00:00  27kN
>>1...Bxh3!
>>  ±  (1.28)   depth: 6/20   00:00:00  51kN
>>1...Bxh3 2.f3 Bf5 3.c3 Qe8 4.Bxf4 Qh5+ 5.Kg1
>>  ±  (1.28)   depth: 7/24   00:00:00  125kN
>>1...Bxh3 2.f3 Bf5 3.c3 Qe8 4.Bxf4 Qh5+ 5.Kg1 Bd3
>>  ±  (1.31)   depth: 8/23   00:00:00  260kN
>>1...f3
>>  ±  (1.28)   depth: 8/24   00:00:00  314kN
>>1...f3 2.Bxg5 Qxg5 3.Rg1 Qf5 4.Qc3 Qf4+ 5.g3 Qf5 6.g4
>>  ±  (1.16)   depth: 9/26   00:00:01  731kN
>>1...Bxh3
>>  ±  (1.12)   depth: 9/27   00:00:01  1317kN
>>1...Bxh3 2.f3 Bc8 3.Bxf4 Ne6 4.dxe6 Qh4+ 5.Kg1 Rxf4 6.Qd5
>>  ±  (1.00)   depth: 9/27   00:00:02  1698kN
>>1...Bxh3 2.f3 Bc8 3.Bxf4 Ne6 4.dxe6 Qh4+ 5.Kg1 Rxf4 6.Qd5
>>  ±  (1.00)   depth: 10/27   00:00:03  2552kN
>>1...Bxh3 2.f3 Bc8 3.Bxf4 Ne6 4.dxe6 Qh4+ 5.Kg1 Rxf4 6.Qe3
>>  ±  (1.09)   depth: 11/31   00:00:07  5091kN
>>1...Bxh3--
>>  +-  (1.41)   depth: 12/32   00:00:22  16702kN
>>1...Bxh3
>>  +-  (1.41)   depth: 12/34   00:00:24  18532kN
>>1...f3
>>  ±  (1.37)   depth: 12/34   00:00:29  21596kN
>>1...f3 2.Bxg5 Qxg5 3.Rg1 Qf5 4.Qc3 Qf4+ 5.g3 Qf5 6.g4
>>  ±  (1.16)   depth: 12/36   00:00:38  28498kN
>>1...Nxh3
>>  ±  (1.12)   depth: 12/36   00:00:47  34730kN
>>1...Nxh3 2.gxh3 Qh4 3.Rh1 Qxh3+ 4.Kg1 Qg4+ 5.Kf1 Qf3 6.Rg1
>>  ±  (1.06)   depth: 12/36   00:00:50  37202kN
>>1...Nf3+
>>  ±  (1.03)   depth: 12/36   00:00:52  38577kN
>>1...Nf3+ 2.gxf3 Qh4 3.Rh1 Bxh3 4.c3 Rf6 5.Bxf4 Rxf4 6.Qe3
>>  =  (0.25)   depth: 12/36   00:00:53  39290kN
>>1...Nf3+ 2.gxf3 Qh4 3.Rh1 Bxh3 4.c3 Rf6 5.Bxf4 Rxf4 6.Qe3
>>  =  (0.00)   depth: 13/32   00:00:55  40746kN
>>1...Nf3+ 2.gxf3 Qh4 3.Rh1 Bxh3 4.c3 Rf6 5.Bxf4 Rxf4 6.Qe3
>>  =  (0.00)   depth: 14/38   00:01:04  47886kN
>>1...Nf3+!
>>  =  (-0.16)   depth: 15/35   00:01:37  73480kN
>>1...Nf3+! 2.gxf3 Qh4 3.Rh1 Bxh3 4.Bxf4 Rxf4 5.Qe3 Rf6 6.Qd4
>>  µ  (-0.84)   depth: 15/39   00:02:08  97818kN
>>
>>(Young, 09.08.2000)
>
>It chose that move rapidly, but the evaluation shows that it is more a random
>glitch than a computer brilliancy.  When it gets the eval right, then I will
>believe that the computer has made a brilliant move.  It sees an advantage of
>less than one pawn, so it does not know how good the move is yet *or* why it
>should choose that one.  It is rather impressive that the computer got to 15
>plies in a minute and a half, and a hundred million nodes in two minutes though.
> Must be a pretty nice machine.


I think it is a PIII at 1 Ghz.
see http://site2936.dellhost.com/forums/1/message.shtml?122812
I wonder if Mark reads this if he could post his Fritz mark?.


Thanks.





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.