Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:48:52 04/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 25, 2001 at 02:42:16, Tanya Deborah wrote: > > >Here is a little interview about * Kramnik-Junior 6 game * in the past Dortmund >GM tournament in where Kramnik beat Junior in a very easy way. > >Please read this : > > >ChessBase: Did you prepare for today?s game? > >Kramnik: Yes, it was generally my plan to get the computer into time trouble so >it would blunder something... > >CB: And seriously? >Kramnik: Okay, I played some training games with Fritz, and I tried all kinds of >setups, because to go for the main lines against the computer makes no sense at >all - you simply forget something and the computer never does this at all. That >is why you have to find an interesting setup where the computer can go wrong. I >tried several different things and finally decided that this setup is the best: >Stonewall, 1.d4 d5 2.e3 and then the computer always plays 2...Nf6 and after >3.Bd3 it is very good that the computer plays 3...e6. It is okay but it gives >you very pleasant type of play against the computer. Then you go 4.f4 and >finally you get what you want. I tried several setups, as I already mentioned, >but in this setup the computer was doing extremely badly. In one training game I >mated the computer very similar to this, even faster. I think in 25 moves. > > >CB: So actually you got what you wanted in the first four moves. > >Kramnik: That?s not the end of the story. I didn?t get any advantage out of the >opening, maybe my position was even slightly worse, but I was happy with it, >because it is exactly the position you need to get against the computer. The >objective evaluation doesn?t really matter so much. I expected the computer to >go wrong at some point and it did so. 13...g6 and 15...Nxd2 were very bad. But >it was very natural. In fact when I was backstage during the game I mentioned to >Piket that I think the computer will play Nxd2 at some point, because this is an >aweful positional move. And finally in two or three move the computer took on >d2. I simply understand the mentality of the computer and that is why I am so >successful. > >******************** > >The Interview is very CLEAR. > >I think, that the program that play against Kramnik in October will need to have >more than a Super fast computer. I think that it will be very good to make a >Special opening book to avoid some unknown openings that Kramnik will have >prepare for the machine. A new opening book-with some help by GrandMasters to >know how to play better against the best Anti computer technique by Kramnik. > >Kramnik will know very good the program and he will prepare for a secure win. > >I wish that the program can show to us a very good chess in October, and also I >will not like to see Kramnik winning almost all the games. > >Kramnik is very dangerous!!! with a copy of the program three months before!! >Please, we need to make something to avoid the disaster! > >Tanya Deborah. A "small book" won't cut it. The first thing the program is going to have to know is how to not lose when white plays a stonewall. The computer loses these games for several reasons: (1) the black pawn on e6; (2) the black bishop trapped behind that pawn and cut off from the kingside; (3) white's space on the kingside with pawns at d4, e3 and f4. When white gets ready for g4 and h4, black has the queen-side to himself, but he has probably castled kingside and gets smothered. There are defenses to this. They are _not_ "book defenses" however. A GM might well try f4 and if black plays d5 then d4 and there you go again. I tried to cure this for a couple of years with book lines. Even had a GM helping. It was hopeless to fix, until I modified the evaluation to handle the opening directly.
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.