Author: Joe Besogn
Date: 05:30:00 11/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2000 at 08:23:16, Joe Besogn wrote:
>On November 10, 2000 at 07:46:31, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>Thorsten, I order you: there is no new paradigm. It is a buzz-word. There is no
>chaos. All can be measured. Accurate. Everything is known already. There are no
>new ideas. You are mad. I am mad. We are losers. We cannot be allowed to win.
>Fritz is very strong. Fritz with 8 processors is very stronger.
>Bigger-faster-more. Don't you understand? Why can't you understand? Are you
>blind? Can you not see? Please see. Please. I can prove it. With results. See
>10-9. See 45%. See 2600 ELO. Do you understand now? Look here is a list. We have
>lists of numbers. Why don't you understand? King safety is +3. You are stupid.
>Drive into the fog and crash in twenty car pile up. See what happens to you.
>
>Continued in all threads .....
You are stupid bean-counter. You know nothing. We are geniuses. We know all.
Years ago. Why can't you see? Are you stupid? Look, we have main line with big
score. Why can't you see? Idiots. See this position. Rxc6 check !!?? attack on
open file free passed pawn king attack obvious. What is the matter with you.
Can't you play chess? What ELO 1700? Hahahahaha. You eat too many hamburgers.
Barf. Barf.
Continued in all threads ......
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.