Author: kurt
Date: 20:37:34 08/29/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2000 at 20:56:08, stuart taylor wrote: >On August 29, 2000 at 13:58:52, Graham Laight wrote: > > >>What Fritz did here is the same as it did to 2 other opponents in London - >>speculative sacrifice. >> >>It gave away its knight to expose the black king. >> >>At first, it's eval was good. After a few moves, its eval went negative. >>Crafty's eval remained between +1 and +2 for a long time. However, the >>positional strengths it had created eventually swung the game back in its >>favour. > > Was this done by some new feature? If so, which? >Or was it something not quite intended, or best, but happened to work out good >anyway, and -by the way- pretty? >> >>I think if Chris Whittington had got CS-Tal doing these sacs, he would have been >>shouting it from the rooftops! >> >>-g >If he did it 2-3 years ago, why not? >But does this mean that Fritz has caught up with CSTAL but more sound at the >same time? (no comparison, of course - when beauty and truth agree). >S.Taylor > >Well..beauty or hard work from fritzes book team. > lets look at the position after Craftys move 16.a3???? >this move invites black to play b4 ripping whites king to pieces. >Crafty had no defence after allowing 16..h5!! (Supper GM Move} >Crafty was let into a position with no threads to detect. >It faces a minjority pawn attack at his queen side,where the 2 nights >are no match for 1rook,2bishops,1queen plus to pawns to give away. >Human players would see that and take appropriate steps. >Craftys engine should not be guided into such positions until its >knowledge allows it cope addequately wiht such positions. > >congratulations "Fritz Team" for move 16...h5! Good work! >Best regards , Kurt Widmann > >
This page took 0.01 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.