Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 04:46:31 11/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 09, 2000 at 18:33:05, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On November 09, 2000 at 15:20:24, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>>Rf3 } 38...Red8 39.Kh1 { Score: 3,42 depth: 10 Kh1 Nf5 Qg5 Bc6 Bg6 Qf6
>>Qh5
>>Nh6 Rg3 Be8 }
>OK... Here is a good point for discussion. My evaluation at this point
>is somewhere between -.2 and -1.0, depending on how deep you let it
>search. Here is the position:
[D]2rr2k1/1p1b2p1/p3p2n/2Bp3B/1P3P1Q/PP5R/1q5P/4R2K b
Lets see what other programs think about move 39...
CSTal2.03: d8 88" +1.16 Qg5 b6 Bxb6 Rf8 Bc5 Rf6 Bg6 Qxa3
Shredder4: d11/23 1'23" +1.07 Qe7 e5 Rh4 d4 fxe5 Qc3 ...
Gandalf4: d9 ~ 1' +0.86 Bg6 e5 Rg3 Qd2 Rxe5 Qc1+ Kg2
Hiarcs7.32: d9/27 1'11" +1.84 Qe7 e5 Rg3 exf4 Rg2
Fritz6: d11/34 1'44" +0.72 Qe7 e5 Rh4 d4 Qxe5 Bc6...
Junior6: d16 1'39" +1.06 Qe7
CMaster6000:d3/8 1'46" +0.71 Qg5 Qd2 Qe5 Rc6 Bg6
>It is black to move. White has the rook and queen doubled on the h file.
>Black has the h-file blocked with the knight on h6. White has no way to
>drive the knight off, and no easy way to capture the knight with some sort
>of trade. IE the h-file is not going to be used for an attack very easily.
>Do you (or anybody) think that white is really up the equivalent of one
>piece (+3.42) here?
Why do you believe black is NOT lost here ?!
IMO the position is very clear. black is shortly before execution.
>Is black blind? Is white over-optimistic?
I think white is right.
As you can see CSTal + Hiarcs have high evaluations too.
They smell that danger.
Of course Gambit-Tiger sees is much earlier in the tree.
Hiarcs and CSTal are SLOW programs, when i let CSTal and Hiarcs compute
LONGER, CSTal says after 1273s
CSTal2.03: d10 1273" +3.33 Qe7 Kh7 Bf7 Qf6 Qxf6 gxf6
Hiarcs7.32: d10/30 34'19" +2.41 Qe7 Kh7
so the other programs SEE it too, only they see it much later.
> Or is the truth somewhere in
>between?
the truth is IMO that white missed the right way to excute black.
the position is lost for black IMO.
Crafty's misevaluation is the problem it came into the position.
and gambit-tigers , as you call it, inflated evaluation is the reason
it played such an attack.
If we give Tiger more time to consider , it sees that Qe7 is better...
>My score for move 47 is -.33... it has very slowly climbed over the last
>8 moves. I don't see how this game is a good example of what you call a
>"new paradigm". It looks like the evaluation was inflated, GT slowly
>found that it couldn't hold that position with the somewhat inflated score,
>and the score settled back down closer to what Crafty was saying.
I want to explain why i believe this game is a good example.
I have seen many many of those games, with cstal and gambit-tiger.
You say: the evaluation was inflated, the score settled back down.
you say so, as if the score is a graph and has to be a line, that should
come very close to what YOU call "reality".
this idea is the old paradigm.
it's like newton and his believe in a universal-time, that is everywhere the
same, and all we have to do is to adjust our watches to this universal-time
that is the same in the whole universe !
GT evaluates the chances to pull you into chaos of a heavy king attack.
this is the fog where the quiesence search has problems to evaluate and to
handle the position.
In CSTal chris has colored this chaos red in the inner-eye graph (an graphical
image of the search-tree!).
In this chaos the old-paradigm programs have problems to find out what is right
and what is wrong. they have no knowledge to differenciate,
they are blind in the fog.
you must forget your ideas about accurate evaluation. you don't know which score
is right. it's not important. if cstal and hiarcs and gambit-tiger
like the position that much that they want to give >2.5 pawns, this is
an indicator that they are different than crafty.
in the position in move 39 there is no difference between
hiarcs / cstal and gambit-tiger , only that gambit-tiger
is faster in seeing the plot !
crafty was wrong. and if it was not losing in the attack (lucky crafty :-))
it will lose in the endgame or wheverever.
old paradigm meets new paradigm.
the evaluation of gambit-tiger was correct.
in the chaos/fog, old-paradigm programs are blind.
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.