Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:54:15 01/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2001 at 03:16:49, Ed Schröder wrote: >On January 04, 2001 at 19:19:12, Graham Laight wrote: > >>On January 04, 2001 at 17:43:30, Ed Schröder wrote: >> >>>On January 04, 2001 at 12:20:41, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >>> >>>>On January 04, 2001 at 12:09:25, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>>> >>>>>[Event "?"] >>>>>[Site "?"] >>>>>[Date "2001.01.04"] >>>>>[Round "?"] >>>>>[White "Rebel Century 3"] >>>>>[Black "van der Wiel, John"] >>>>>[Result "0-1"] >>>>>[ECO "B15"] >>>>>[BlackElo "2531"] >>>>>[PlyCount "118"] >>>>>[EventDate "2001.01.02"] >>>>>[SourceDate "2001.01.04"] >>>>> >>>>>1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 a6 4. Be2 b5 5. a3 e6 6. Nf3 Nf6 7. e5 Nfd7 8. Bg5 Be7 >>>>>9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. b4 a5 11. Na2 axb4 12. axb4 O-O 13. Bd3 f6 14. exf6 gxf6 15. >>>>>O-O Rf7 16. Re1 Nf8 17. Nh4 Qd8 18. Re3 Rg7 19. Rg3 Qe7 20. Qf3 Rxg3 21. Qxg3+ >>>>>Qg7 22. Qd6 Qd7 23. Qf4 Qg7 24. Nf3 Bd7 25. Qc7 Be8 26. Qd8 Bg6 27. h3 Qf7 28. >>>>>Bxg6 hxg6 29. Nh2 Kg7 30. Ng4 Nfd7 31. Qc7 e5 32. Qb7 Ra3 33. dxe5 fxe5 34. >>>>>Nxe5 Nxe5 35. Qxb8 Qf6 36. Re1 Rxa2 37. Qxe5 Qxe5 38. Rxe5 Rxc2 39. Re1 Kf6 40. >>>>>Kf1 d4 41. Re8 Rc4 42. Rc8 Ke7 43. Ke2 Kd6 44. Rd8+ Kc7 45. Rg8 Rxb4 46. Kd3 c5 >>>>>47. Rg7+ Kb6 48. Rxg6+ Ka5 49. h4 Rb3+ 50. Ke4 d3 51. Rd6 c4 52. g4 Rb2 53. g5 >>>>>Re2+ 54. Kf3 Re8 55. Rd4 b4 56. Rxc4 b3 57. Rc1 b2 58. Rd1 Kb4 59. Kf4 Kc3 0-1 >>>>> >>>>>Enrique >>>> >>>>A convincing demonstration that anti-computerchess played by a GM is still too >>>>much for todays programs. >>>>This opponent is indeed a very brave choice of the Rebel team. I think that >>>>there are many opponents with higher ELO, but easier to play for Rebel, - my >>>>deep respects to Ed for playing John van der Wiel. >>>>And btw a very interesting game ! >>>>Uli >>> >>>Thank Uli for the encouraging words. John v/d Wiel after the game said he >>>wasn't impressed by Rebel's play in game 1 and 2 but in game-3 he had a >>>very hard time and was impressed by Rebel's pressure. He also said that >>>39.Re1 was Rebel's only mistake (39.Re6! Kf7 40.Rd6! is probably a draw) >>>and thereafter white was lost. >>> >>>He also mentioned that during the middlegame white maybe could have played >>>Re1 sacrificing the kningt on a2 for a strong attack. I forgot about the >>>move number. I would be interested to know if anyone noticed this. >>> >>>2-1 for GM John v/d Wiel still 3 games to go starting next tuesday. >>> >>>During the 3 games so far I noticed the following pattern by John: >>> >>>. force the game only into strategic lines even if there (probably) is a >>>better move. >>> >>>What can one do? >>> >>>Ed >> >>If JVDW is "playing the player", then play him at his own game. >> >>There is an option which I'm 90% sure will win the next game (but has a 10% >>chance of making you look silly). >> >>Bob once mentioned that, long ago, due to some sort of error, the clocks didn't >>work properly on Cray Blitz. The computer played its moves much too quickly. >>What happened was that, while the computer undoubtedly played marginally worse, >>the human opponents played a lot worse, and did far more badly than the form >>guide would have predicted. Remember that those were _blitz_ games. I don't think this will work at all in a 40/2 game. You will just get crushed tactically on the moves you don't predict correctly (and therefore use a short search time). >> >>If I were in your shoes, I would take 2 measures to try to knock your opponent >>out of his smooth, confident, flowing state of mind: >> >>1. Set Rebel's clock to move after a fixed length of time (preferably 30 >>seconds, but certainly no more than 40 seconds). A high proportion of the moves >>it will select will be the same as the 3 minute selection would have been anyway >>- and there's no point in worrying about tactical mistakes against a human! The >>effect of this will be to throttle off nearly half JVDW's thinking time. The >>impact on the human's standard of play will be far more devastating than it will >>be on the computer's. > >This is a good hint. In game-1 I made a typo setting the playing level. >Instead of using 00:02:45 as average time I typed 00:01:45. As a result >Rebel played much too fast. The positive side effect was v/d Wiel had >less time to think and had big time troubles. > >From the GM challenge games I remember I tried a system that focus on >the time control of the opponent. I will try this in game-4 and see if >it is successful. > >Thanks. > >Ed > > >>2. Set Rebel's playing style to the safest, blandest, most pedestrian level >>possible. This will have 2 benefits - minimising the risk of poor positioning, >>and lulling the opponent into a false sense of security. Go for one of >>humanity's greatest weaknesses - complacency! You're going to need a mistake >>from JVDW to beat him anyway - why not maximise your chances of getting this >>mistake. >> >>In conclusion, while at first glance this looks like the blackest day for >>computers since DB's game 6 against GK in the first (1996) match, if you're >>willing to "play the player" rather than "play great chess", there might still >>be time to throw your opponent off his stride... >> >>-g
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.