Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:21:54 10/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 17, 2000 at 21:42:25, Chessfun wrote:
>On October 17, 2000 at 20:53:45, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On October 17, 2000 at 14:25:32, Chessfun wrote:
>>
>>>On October 17, 2000 at 14:23:38, Chessfun wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 17, 2000 at 14:22:19, Chessfun wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On October 17, 2000 at 14:19:56, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On October 17, 2000 at 14:17:46, Chessfun wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Rd7+ Re7 Qb3+ Kf8 Rd6 Nxe5 Qc3 b4
>>>>>>>depth 11 +3.18
>>>>>>
>>>>>>WHAT??? No way (I hope).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Kramnik,V - Kasparov,G
>>>>>>8/5k1p/p1nRrp1P/PpP2qp1/4p3/4B3/1P3PP1/3Q2K1 w - - 0 1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Analysis by Deep Fritz T28:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>43.Rd7+ Kg6 44.Rg7+ Kxh6 45.Qd7 Re5 46.Rxh7+ Qxh7 47.Qxc6 Kg6
>>>>>> ² (0.44) Depth: 11/28 00:00:50 6786kN
>>>>>> ² (0.50) Depth: 12/32 00:01:55 15933kN
>>>>>>
>>>>>>(Irazoqui, Cadaqués 17.10.2000)
>>>>>
>>>>>Still showing
>>>>>Rd7+ Re7 Qb3+ kf8 Rd6 Nxa5 Qc3 b4 Qxf6+ etc
>>>>>
>>>>>Depth 13. +2.84
>>>>>
>>>>>I'll check after Rd7+ Kg6
>>>>>
>>>>>Sarah.
>>>>
>>>>Added score.
>>>
>>>if Kg6
>>>Rg7+ Kxh6 Rc7 Qe5 QD7 Ne7 g4 Kg7 Bd4 Qxe6 Qxc7 Bxf6+ Kf8
>>>+3.88 Depth 12
>>>
>>>Sarah.
>>
>>
>>That eval is too big. IE this is another example. I don't recall this
>>exact position but white is either up 1 or 2 pawns (2 I think) but with
>>lots of holes and a queen and knight to deal with.
>
>
>This score was posted after both Enrique's and Uri's questioned
>what would Gambit reply to Kg6.
>
>The depth at this point is only 12 and was still changing
>as I typed, however it saw what other programs did not see at
>that point.
>
>Kramnik then played Qh5+......I sent him a quick email of Gambit's
>eval then he went back so as to play Rd7+ :-)
>
>
>>Most programs had this as +1 to +1.3 in this stage of the game. I became
>>less and less optimistic for white as I watched, as the queen is simply a real
>>pain, and the knight is the optimal piece to have working with the queen in a
>>board with pawns moved everywhere.
>
>
>From what I saw, most programs did not see what was coming, at least
>judging by the kibitz's on ICC.
Here is how Crafty's eval went over a few moves:
move 35... +.25 (all scores from white's perspective)
move 40... 0.00
move 45... +1.20
move 50... +1.80
move 55... +1.58
move 60... +2.00
move 61... +1.03
move 63... +0.68
move 64... 0.00
My eval for move 43 was +1.36, PV:
16 8:48 1.36 43. Rd7+ Kg6 44. Rg7+ Kxh6 45. Qd7
Re5 46. Qf7 Rd5 47. Rxh7+ Qxh7 48.
Qxd5 Qc7 49. Qxe4 Nxa5 50. f4 Kh5 51.
Qe8+ Kg4 52. fxg5 Qe5 53. Qxe5 fxe5
Others that were kibitzing (except gambit tiger) were pretty close to this
value, fritz slightly lower...
>
>
>>I wasn't surprised by the outcome, particularly. If programs say +2 or less,
>>draws don't cause any speculation or bug-hunting...
>
>
>I will make you a wager.
>Gambit 1.0 will beat any program at the time controls left which
>was roughly 60 mins each side.
Better check enrique's post. You lose before you start.
>
>
>>I think the krnp vs kr might have been easier to win than this game was. Of
>>course, taking time to eat the a-pawn in this game might have cost white more
>>than he thought...
>
>In Gambit's opinion many of the moves played by white after Rd7+ were
>inferior. I happen to agree.
>
>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.