Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 15:55:45 07/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2001 at 18:31:02, Kurt Widmann wrote: >On July 08, 2001 at 16:45:17, Mike S. wrote: > >>On July 08, 2001 at 15:05:30, Kurt Widmann wrote: >> >>>(...) I do not belief that fritzes bookkookers >>>will try to outbook Kramnik,except they hire Kasparov or Anand for this work. >> >>Good idea! >> >>Although I think, these two would prefer to keep their new opening ideas for >>their own games against Kramnik (or against each other)! :o) >> >>Opening books and their influence on the results are a constant topic among >>computerchess fans, but I'm afraid only a small minority of us has expert >>opening knowledge or abilities I think. So it's difficult to find any >>conclusions. Sometimes it's noticed that progs come out of the book with very >>low evaluations, or in types of positions they seem not to be able to handle >>well... Then, maybe somebody takes the effort to try to improve the book based >>on these observations, maybe not. >> >>I think, computer books also still contain bad moves, and/or are vulnerable to >>traps (in connection to the engine's strenght of course). For example the >>follwing incorrect sac (5.Bxf7+) will probably kill some progs if their book >>isn't prepared for it, i.e. some will play 7...Kxg5?? in the (B) variation >>instead of the correct 7...Qe8 (B2), or loose after 9...Qc6?: >> >>1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Ng5+ Kg8 >> >>[6...Ke8?! 7.e6 Bxe6 8.Nxe6 Qd7 9.Qg4 +/=; >> >>6...Kg6 >> >>A) 7.h4 h6? 8.h5+ Kf5 (8...Kxg5 9.Qf3 Nd5 10.d3+ Nf4 11.Qxf4# >>Prestel,O-Doederlein,F/Endingen AT 1987) 9.g4+ Kxe5 10.Qe2+ Kd4 11.b4 Bf5 >>12.Bb2+ Kd5 13.Nc3+ Kc6 14.Qb5#; >> >>B) 7.Qf3 >>B1) 7...Kxg5? 8.Qf7 g6 9.d4+ Kh5 10.Qf4 h6 11.g3 Bg4 (11...g5 12.Qf7+ Kg4 >>13.h3#) 12.h3 Bxh3 13.Rxh3#; >>B2) 7...Qe8 8.e6 B2a) 8...h6 9.h4 B2a1) 9...h5 10.Qe4+ Kh6 (10...Kf6 11.Rh3 g6 >>12.Qd4+ Kf5 13.Rf3#) 11.Nf7+ Qxf7 12.d4+ g5 13.hxg5+ Kg7 14.exf7+-; B2a2) >>9...hxg5 10.Qe4+ Kf6 11.hxg5+ Kxg5 12.Rxh8 Kf6 13.Rxf8+ Qxf8 14.Qf3+ Kxe6 >>15.Qxf8+-; B2b) 8...Bxe6 9.Nxe6 Qc8±; B2c) 8...h5 9.g4 hxg4 (9...Kh6 10.Qe4 Qg6 >>11.Nf7+ Kh7 12.Qxg6+ Kxg6 13.Nxh8++-) 10.Qxg4 Rh5 11.Nf7+ Kf6 12.Qxh5 Bxe6±] >> >>7.Qf3 Qe8 8.e6 g6 [8...h6?? 9.Qf7+ Qxf7 10.exf7#] 9.Nf7 Bxe6 [9...Qc6? 10.Nh6+ >>Kg7 11.Qf7+ Kxh6 12.d3+ Kh5 13.g4+ Kh4 14.Rg1 Qd5 15.Nd2 Qe5+ 16.Kf1 Nc4 17.Nf3+ >>Kh3 18.Nxe5 Ne3+ 19.Bxe3 dxe5 20.Qf3+ Kxh2 21.Qh1# 1-0 Scheidl,M-Genius3 >>(40/20:00 P133)] 10.Nxh8 Kxh8 11.Nc3 Nc6-+ Line >> >>Regards, >>M.Scheidl > >WOW!! Fritz6,Shredder5,Nimzo and Crafty are dead meat in this line. >I have a few lines myself, which normally win against programs without lerning >functions. I belief it is not very difficult to come up with a chrusher >line against current books as was demonstrated against pocket fritz with >its shredder book. Question,at what rating would be Tiger without its human >prepared booklines? > >Kurt Widmann Hi! I have analysed this line several years ago, and I don't believe white has more then a draw if black defends well. A dozen games in my database with 5 white wins, 6 black wins and one draw. Bertil
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.