Author: Albert Silver
Date: 08:47:09 05/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 2001 at 11:03:52, Uri Blass wrote:
>On May 01, 2001 at 10:34:38, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On May 01, 2001 at 08:21:58, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On May 01, 2001 at 07:33:36, Torstein Hall wrote:
>>>
>>>>This may show how little I understand out of chess, but I can not understand
>>>>some sequences from this game! To me it looks like DJ has no understanding of a
>>>>closed position. (If Junior goes on the play Kramnik, I think he will hack it
>>>>into small pieces!) Can someone please explain the idea behind DJ's moves?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Date: 1/5/2001
>>>>White: DJ
>>>>Black: DF
>>>>Opening: D58 QGD: Tartakower System
>>>>
>>>>1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 O-O 7. e3 b6 8. Rc1 Bb7
>>>>9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Bd3 c5 12. O-O Nd7
>>>>
>>>>[D]r2q1rk1/pb1n1pp1/1p3b1p/2pp4/3P4/2NBPN2/PP3PPP/2RQ1RK1 w - - 0 13
>>>>
>>>>DJ is now comming up with a move sequence that looks completly stupid to me! And
>>>>its in the opening book! There must be something I miss here....
>>>>
>>>>13. Bf5? [13.Bb1 looks like the normal move to me.] 13...g6 14. Bxd7? [And
>>>>suddenly black has a solid position and the advantage of the bishop pair!]
>>>>14..cxd4 15. exd4 Qxd7 And black has no more to wory about. This moves are in my
>>>>CB opening book, but there white goes 15.Bc6 and looks like he got some
>>>>initisiative.
>>>
>>>The first 14 moves were book moves and Junior did not calculate for a second to
>>>find them.
>>>
>>>The first computer move was 15.exd4 and Junior was happy with it(+0.18)
>>>
>>>I do not think that this move was the error and Junior could do a draw later in
>>>the game.
>>>
>>>15.Bc6 Bxc6 Nd4 is also possible and seems to me better but I cannot see 1147
>>>knodes per second so I may miss something.
>>>
>>>Uri
>>
>>Nor can DJ. Didn't you correctly point out that the tactical error that cost it
>>the game against DF was done at a VERY low speed of 53 kN/sec.?
>
>I am not sure that Fritz could not win that game without the tactical error.
>
>Uri
Perhaps, but nor is it clear that it could. The point is more how and why did it
happen in the first place. This was one very clear error because we saw an
amazingly low NPS count. How about other less clear ones, that might have been
better concealed? It sheds doubt on the whole auto232 match concept if you ask
me. There was also the crash that brought the machines down in game 12. How did
that happen if all they were doing was running the programs? If they can simply
crash out of the blue, then whatever caused the crash could also just as easily
cause other failures such as odd moves, etc.
Albert
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.