Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:18:31 08/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 30, 2000 at 05:24:22, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On August 29, 2000 at 22:06:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 29, 2000 at 14:26:44, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On August 29, 2000 at 14:14:51, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On August 29, 2000 at 11:50:00, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 29, 2000 at 11:44:24, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I can say that Fritz did not get a winning position out of book against Crafty. >>>>>> >>>>>>I found that Crafty17.11 can find 21.Nxe6 against Fritz with more time. >>>>>>[D]1r2kb1r/2qb1p2/p3pP2/1pp5/3NP2p/P1N2Q2/2P4P/1K1R1BR1 w k - 0 1 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Unfortunately Crafty did not have good alpha that it probably needed in order to >>>>>>find this move. >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>>Oh well Fritz searching 13 ply extending lots of checks and doing >>>>>checks in qsearch against crafty with crafty a king nearly mated and >>>>>searching 12 to 13 ply without doing checks in qsearch. Note that >>>>>fritz has also a lot of threat extensions. >>>>> >>>>>Crafty repeated exactly the same line as against Nimzo. Very dumb. >>>>> >>>>>So it was dead lost from all sides. >>>>> >>>>>Play 100 games crafty here against DIEP, Fritz, Nimzo, Zchess, SOS, >>>>>Shredder or anything that is doing either a lot of checks or doing >>>>>checks in qsearch. Bye Bye crafty. Crafty in Najdorf is a zero in advance >>>>>at icc it basically plays e6 d6 systems. NOT aggressive najdorf systems. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>I think checks in the q-search is an exaggerated advantage. I play all of >>>>the above programs on ICC, all the time, and I am not getting rolled into a >>>>ball by any of them.n Didn't you play a bunch of games vs crafty using a >>>>quad 550 xeon for Diep? Did those q-search checks make a big difference? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>So selecting this opening is stupid in advance anyway, like i discovered >>>>>with DIEP in Caro-Kann. >>>> >>>> >>>>I don't think it is a bad opening. I generally don't play the Sicilian as >>>>black against computers. As white, I alternate between d4 and e4 openings >>>>so black will get a chance to play Sicilians. At a reasonable time control, >>>>my quad will find nxe6. My PII/400 notebook fails low at 5 minutes. The >>>>xeon would probably fail low at the 1-1.5 min mark. It would then use as >>>>much time as needed and would certainly find Nxe6. I am surprised that the >>>>alpha didn't have time to find this, or at least have time to fail low at >>>>depth-14, which is strange. >>> >>>OH dear. How do i start explaining here. I'm talking to a mountain here. >>> >>>Najdorf is a very specialistic part of the sicilian where the black king >>>is facing bunches of checks in the center. Wanting to castle there, >>>OR being tactical weak there OR falling into a book line means you lose. >>> >>>The rest of the sicilians i don't talk about here. We talk here about >>>crafty single cpu at 300k nps against an opponent at a million NPS. >> >>Crafty should have been able to find Nxe6. Why it didn't, I don't yet know. >>It seems that it was moving far faster than it should have. I can't reproduce >>the fast moves here, so it was something that happened in London. I may have >>given Graham a bogus command that screwed up the time control. He may have >>entered a time control wrong. I might have a program bug that asks for seconds >>but means minutes, somewhere. Until I know more, I don't have any idea why it >>would be moving in just over a minute. >> >>However, I would take the white position as a human, any day. Until someone >>convinces me that black wins no matter what. >> >> >> >>> >>>We don't talk about a few blitz games B01 or something at icc. >>> >>>We talk about WMCC and about Crafty versus Fritz where crafty >>>repeats a line which and loses chanceless, even though everyone >>>in this room felt it wasn't smart to repeat the same B99 mainline >>>as against Nimzo. >>> >>>Still finding Nxe6 doesn't solve the problem for you. >>> >>>You lose a few moves further then. >> >>I am not convinced of this, yet. I have seen Fritz make tactical errors. >>I have seen everyone make them. I don't think this is as clear as you >>imply it is... > >The only reason you are arguing here is because fritz is not perfect, >where crafty has the habit to lose somewhere in najdorfs. It doesn't have a "habit" of losing at all. I don't fix these kinds of problems by saying "OK, I just won't play that opening". I did this for years with CB, but decided in Crafty to teach it how to play with a bishop on g7 or g2 in front of a castled king position. Now rather than worrying about transpositions into such openings, I ignore it because Crafty can play those positions just fine. > >Note that fritz also made severe error in blitz against diep even though >i was outsearched by 2 or 3 ply or so. This was not in the mainline >najdorf but the modern mainline. What is the point? I simply don't think q-search checks are a requirement for a strong program. And I don't think this particular opening has to be avoided by programs that don't use them. Why don't we play a long match playing only that opening from both sides? If you win them all I will re-think. Crafty plays it all the time on ICC, and isn't getting rolled into a ball all the time. Otherwise book learning would have disabled the opening completely.
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.