Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 10:08:44 11/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 2000 at 12:18:05, Peter Skinner wrote:
>>>>[Event "ICC 3 3"]
>>>>[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
>>>>[Date "2000.11.13"]
>>>>[Round "-"]
>>>>[White "WICKER-MAN"]
>>>>[Black "Rebel Tiger 13.0"]
>>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>>[ICCResult "Black checkmated"]
>>>>[WhiteElo "1884"]
>>>>[BlackElo "2645"]
>>>>[Opening "Sicilian: Taimanov variation"]
>>>>[ECO "B46"]
>>>>[NIC "SI.39"]
>>>>[Time "23:21:26"]
>>>>[TimeControl "180+3"]
>>>>
>>>>1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bc4 Qc7 7. Bb3 b5 8.
>>>>a3 Nf6 9. O-O Nxd4 10. Qxd4 Bd6 11. h3 Bh2+ 12. Kh1 Be5 13. Qe3 Bxc3 14.
>>>>bxc3 Bb7 15. f3 O-O 16. a4 d5 17. e5 Nd7 18. f4 bxa4 19. Rxa4 Bc6 20. Ra1
>>>>Bb5 21. Rf3 a5 22. Ba3 Rfc8 23. Bd6 Qb7 24. f5 a4 25. Ba2 Bc4 26. Bxc4 Rxc4
>>>>27. f6 Qb2 28. Qg5 Qxa1+ 29. Kh2 Qh1+ 30. Kxh1 Nxf6 31. exf6 Rg4 32. hxg4 g6
>>>>33. Qh6 a3 34. Qg7# {Black checkmated} 1-0
>>>
>>>
>>Another point. It is highly likely that the opponent used a computer here. I
>>base this on a couple of things. Near the end, there is a deep mate. He played
>>it _perfectly_. Which I don't think an 1800 player could do. If I were
>>betting, I would bet that white is a computer.
>>
>>If I were to criticize moves, I would pick the following moves for black as
>>suspect (from a human perspective): 11. ... Bh2+ seems totally pointless.
>>23. ... Qb7 seems to be worse than pointless. This is a queen, not a bishop.
>>I also don't like 24. ... a4. Advancing passers is often good, but the further
>>they advance, the easier they are to attack and the harder they are to defend.
>>White is attacking on the kingside. Black really doesn't need to waste time
>>on the queenside just yet, when he has no pieces for defending the kingside.
>>
>>However, on the other hand, Tiger was playing a computer in human clothing.
>>Nothing good can come of that, and drawing conclusions is harder. I would
>>_never_ believe than an 1800 player can beat today's programs. yes, it might
>>happen once in every 1000 games. But that is close enough to zero to instantly
>>turn on warning lights when I see it. In this case, if you analyze the game
>>with another program (I used Crafty) it couldn't find any improvement for white
>>from move 18 on. Which is _very_ suspicious...
>
>After move 18 there is _no_ improvement. I have no doubts about wicker-man being
>a computer.
>
>Being rated on ICC at 1800 is like being rated about 1400-1500 on FICS. There is
>almost no possible way for that type player to beat todays programs. I would
>inform speedtrap of his actions.
I think that's crazy. It was a good game. Being rated 1800 on ICC is somewhat
random, and unless the FICS rating system has changed, it is not 400 points
lower.
My last rating was 2000 on FICS, 1800 on ICC, and 1970 USCF. I would have a
hard time beating these programs, but if I did it, it might look like this.
bruce
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.