Author: Roy Brunjes
Date: 10:04:29 10/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 28, 2000 at 12:04:47, Uri Blass wrote:
>On October 28, 2000 at 11:43:14, Roy Brunjes wrote:
>
>>On October 28, 2000 at 01:07:40, Albert Silver wrote:
>>
>>>It really was nice. I was beginning to doubt Gambit had anything when it
>>>uncorked a really neat shot deserving of a diagram:
>>>
>>>[Event "?"]
>>>[Site "?"]
>>>[Date "28/10/2000"]
>>>[Round "?"]
>>>[White "SubtleOne"]
>>>[Black "crafty"]
>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>[WhiteElo "2979"]
>>>[BlackElo "2992"]
>>>[Opening "D66 QGD: Orthodox Defense, Bd3 Line"]
>>>
>>>{Time control = 5 3 Engine book(s): ct.tbk }
>>>1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e3 O-O 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.Rc1 c6 8.Bd3 h6 9.Bf4
>>>dxc4 10.Bxc4 Nb6 11.Bd3 Nh5 12.Be5 f6 13.Bg3 Nxg3 14.hxg3 Nd5 15.Nh4 Rf7 16.Qh5
>>>Nxc3 17.bxc3 Ba3 18.Rb1 Qd5 19.Qg6 f5 20.Rb3 Rf6 21.Qh5 Bd6 22.Qe8+ Rf8 23.Qg6
>>>Qa5 24.Bc4 Rf6 25.Qe8+ Kh7 26.Nf3 Rg6 27.Bd3 Qxa2 28.Nd2 Qa1+ 29.Bb1 Qa5 30.e4
>>>Rb8 31.e5 Ba3
>>>
>>>[D]1rb1Q3/pp4pk/2p1p1rp/q3Pp2/3P4/bRP3P1/3N1PP1/1B2K2R w K a3 9 1
>>>
>>>32.Ne4 Bc1 33.Qe7 Kh8 34.Nf6 gxf6 35.exf6 Bd7 36.f4 Rbg8 37.f7 Qc7 38.Ke2 Bxf4
>>>39.fxg8Q+ Kxg8 40.gxf4 Rxg2+ 41.Kf1 Rg7 42.Qh4 c5 43.Qxh6 cxd4 44.Bd3 dxc3
>>>45.Be2 Kf7 46.Qh5+ Kf6 47.Qh4+ Kf7 48.Rxb7 Qc8 49.Rg1 Rxg1+ 50.Kxg1 e5 51.Bc4+
>>>Kg7 52.Qg5+ Kh7 53.Qxf5+ Kh8 54.Qf6+ Kh7 55.f5 Qc5+ 56.Kg2 Qxc4 57.Rxd7+ Qf7
>>>58.Qxf7+ {crafty resigns} 1-0
>>>
>>> Albert
>>
>>Nicely played by Gambit Tiger to be sure. Century 3.0 (with STORM) personality
>>finds an improvement however:
>>
>>After 23. ... Qa5, STORM wants to play 24. Nxf5! and breakthrough on the h file.
>> The line STORM wants to play out is: 24. ... Rxf5 25. Rxh6 Bd7 26. g4! Qxa2
>>(everything else is a disaster it seems) 27. gxf5 Rf8 [or 27.... Qxb3 28. f6 and
>>mate in 6] 28. Rh7 and Black is doomed -- in fact mate in 12 seen after 32
>>seconds by STORM. The moves for white are generated at 5 3 time controls, the
>>defences for Black I let STORM think for at least a minute on each (sometimes
>>much more).
>
>24.Nxf5 is winning but it is not the right way to analyze.
>
>programs may miss the right defence in a game.
>
>It is better to use a normal program for black and not storm because I do not
>trust storm's evaluations.
>
>After 24.Nxf5 Rxf5 25.Rxh6 normal programs see that white has a winning
>advantage in a few minutes(evaluation of more than +3)
>
>They can also see that black has no alternative for 24...Rxf5 without a bigger
>advantage for white and the conclusion is that 24.Nxf5 is winning.
>
>Uri
Uri,
I agree that using STORM for trying to analyze Black's defensive tries is
questionable. I was a bit lazy and just used STORM when another personality or
even program would have been more reliable. Still, as you point out, Nxf5 is
indeed winning.
Roy
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.