Author: Chessfun
Date: 21:23:29 10/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 2000 at 23:16:04, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On October 16, 2000 at 22:24:35, Chessfun wrote:
>
>>On October 16, 2000 at 21:10:04, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On October 16, 2000 at 19:51:41, Chessfun wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 15, 2000 at 21:35:33, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I have to disagree. It is not hard to tune my (or any other) program to
>>>>>play this move. If you watch gambit tiger play, it has some _outrageous_
>>>>>scores. In a game on ICC the other night, Crafty was at -.2, gambit tiger
>>>>>was at +3.2...
>>>>
>>>>Dr. I am interested in seeing this game.
>>>>I assume it was against subtleone as I currently see 9 in
>>>>it's history. Can you advise which game it was.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>I honestly don't know. Albert can answer as we were chatting during the
>>>games... he was kibitzing tiger scores, crafty was kibitzing its own scores.
>>>
>>>About all I can do to help is to say crafty was white, it was an opposite
>>>castling game (crafty on queenside, tiger on the kingside). I came in right
>>>after the opening so I didn't notice what it was. And due to distractions I
>>>don't know how it ended. I simply remembered +3.2 from tiger, and -.2 for
>>>Crafty... until finally Albert said something like "+.5 here now, it seems
>>>that the attack is over..."
>>>
>>>Bob
>>
>>The queenside kingside thing was perfect.
>>From searching Crafty Subtleone I come up with only three games
>>since Gambit 0.95 was first released.
>>
>>Since this first game was drawn it is logical to look at it first
>>as at some point in the other games Gambit would have been up and
>>since the other two are blitz times it isn't likely them that were
>>being kibitzed as to score.
>>
>>From looking at this game with Gambit 0.95 which was the only version
>>available on the date the game was played, I can find no point where
>>Gambit thinks it is winning by more than a minimal amount.
>>
>>Maybe Albert can shed some light on it.
>
>I believe that this first game is the one. I didn't like the move a4 for
>black, as it made it difficult to break things open without tossing material.
>Somewhere in there for several moves Albert was kibitzing scores of up to
>+3.2... and beyond. Perhaps he can supply more info. The last two appear
>to be the same identical game? Either that is a mistake or my book learning
>is broken...
I'll ask Albert about it as I never get a point where Gambit thinks
it's winning in analysis by more than a minimal margin.
You're right the last two are identical. My mistake I apologize.
Sarah.
>
>>
>>[Event "ICC 60 3"]
>>[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
>>[Date "2000.10.09"]
>>[Round "-"]
>>[White "crafty"]
>>[Black "SubtleOne"]
>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>[ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
>>[WhiteElo "2655"]
>>[BlackElo "2543"]
>>[Opening "Sicilian: Richter-Rauzer, Rauzer attack, 7...Be7 defense, 9...Nxd4"]
>>[TimeControl "3600+3"]
>>
>>1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qd2 Be7 8.
>>O-O-O O-O 9. f4 Nxd4 10. Qxd4 Qa5 11. Bc4 Bd7 12. e5 dxe5 13. fxe5 Bc6 14.
>>Bd2 Nd7 15. Nd5 Qc5 16. Nxe7+ Qxe7 17. Rhe1 Nb6 18. Bb3 Rfc8 19. Qg4 Bd5 20.
>>Bg5 Qf8 21. Bxd5 Nxd5 22. Rd2 Rc7 23. Re4 Rac8 24. Red4 b5 25. Kb1 a5 26. c3
>>a4 27. a3 Rc6 28. h4 b4 29. axb4 a3 30. bxa3 Rxc3 31. R2d3 Qe8 32. Bh6 g6
>>33. Rxd5 exd5 34. Rxc3 Rxc3 35. Qd4 Rb3+ 36. Ka2 Qa4 37. Bc1 Rg3 38. Qxd5
>>Qc2+ 39. Bb2 Rxg2 40. Qb3 Qe4 41. b5 Rg1 42. Bc3 Rg3 43. b6 Qg2+ 44. Qb2 Qb7
>>45. Qb3 Rxc3 46. Qxc3 Qxb6 47. Qc8+ Kg7 48. Qc3 Kg8 49. Qc8+ Kg7 50. Qc3 Kg8
>>{Game drawn by repetition}
>>1/2-1/2
>>
>>[Event "ICC 5 3"]
>>[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
>>[Date "2000.10.16"]
>>[Round "-"]
>>[White "crafty"]
>>[Black "SubtleOne"]
>>[Result "0-1"]
>>[ICCResult "White resigns"]
>>[WhiteElo "2935"]
>>[BlackElo "2912"]
>>[Opening "Sicilian: Richter-Rauzer, Rauzer attack, 7...Be7"]
>>[TimeControl "300+3"]
>>
>>1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qd2 Be7 8.
>>O-O-O O-O 9. Nb3 Qb6 10. f3 Rd8 11. Be3 Qc7 12. Qf2 d5 13. exd5 Nxd5 14.
>>Nxd5 Rxd5 15. Rxd5 exd5 16. g4 Bf6 17. Kb1 Be6 18. c3 Rc8 19. Bxa7 Nxa7 20.
>>Qxa7 Qf4 21. Bg2 b5 22. Rc1 Qxh2 23. Qf2 Qf4 24. Qd2 Qxd2 25. Nxd2 d4 26.
>>Ne4 b4 27. a3 bxc3 28. bxc3 Be7 29. cxd4 Ba2+ 30. Kb2 Bxa3+ 31. Kxa3 Rxc1
>>32. Kxa2 Rc2+ 33. Kb3 Rxg2 34. d5 f5 35. gxf5 Kf7 36. d6 h5 37. Nc5 h4 38.
>>Ne6 Ke8 39. Nf4 Rf2 40. Kc4 Rxf3 41. Ne2 h3 42. Nd4 Rf2 43. Kd3 h2 44. Ke3
>>Rg2 45. Kd3 h1=Q 46. f6 Qd1+ 47. Kc4 Rg4 48. f7+ Kxf7 49. Kb5 Qxd4 50. d7
>>Qd5+ 51. Ka6 Qc6+ 52. Ka7 {White resigns} 0-1
>>
>>[Event "ICC 5 3"]
>>[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
>>[Date "2000.10.16"]
>>[Round "-"]
>>[White "crafty"]
>>[Black "SubtleOne"]
>>[Result "0-1"]
>>[ICCResult "White resigns"]
>>[WhiteElo "2935"]
>>[BlackElo "2912"]
>>[Opening "Sicilian: Richter-Rauzer, Rauzer attack, 7...Be7"]
>>[TimeControl "300+3"]
>>
>>1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qd2 Be7 8.
>>O-O-O O-O 9. Nb3 Qb6 10. f3 Rd8 11. Be3 Qc7 12. Qf2 d5 13. exd5 Nxd5 14.
>>Nxd5 Rxd5 15. Rxd5 exd5 16. g4 Bf6 17. Kb1 Be6 18. c3 Rc8 19. Bxa7 Nxa7 20.
>>Qxa7 Qf4 21. Bg2 b5 22. Rc1 Qxh2 23. Qf2 Qf4 24. Qd2 Qxd2 25. Nxd2 d4 26.
>>Ne4 b4 27. a3 bxc3 28. bxc3 Be7 29. cxd4 Ba2+ 30. Kb2 Bxa3+ 31. Kxa3 Rxc1
>>32. Kxa2 Rc2+ 33. Kb3 Rxg2 34. d5 f5 35. gxf5 Kf7 36. d6 h5 37. Nc5 h4 38.
>>Ne6 Ke8 39. Nf4 Rf2 40. Kc4 Rxf3 41. Ne2 h3 42. Nd4 Rf2 43. Kd3 h2 44. Ke3
>>Rg2 45. Kd3 h1=Q 46. f6 Qd1+ 47. Kc4 Rg4 48. f7+ Kxf7 49. Kb5 Qxd4 50. d7
>>Qd5+ 51. Ka6 Qc6+ 52. Ka7 {White resigns} 0-1
>>
>>
>>Sarah.
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.