Author: Chuck
Date: 18:44:59 07/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2001 at 18:42:57, John Merlino wrote:
>On July 23, 2001 at 18:22:49, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On July 23, 2001 at 12:21:38, odell hall wrote:
>>
>>>[D] r2qr1k1/pp2ppbp/2p1nnp1/6B1/2PP4/5N1P/PPBQ1PP1/R3R1K1 w - - 0 15
>>>
>>> Gambit2 Finds this immediately
>>>
>>>
>>>hall,o - Junior 7
>>>r2qr1k1/pp2ppbp/2p1nnp1/6B1/2PP4/5N1P/PPBQ1PP1/R3R1K1 w - - 0 1
>>>
>>>Analysis by Gambit Tiger 2.0:
>>>
>>>1.Bxf6 Bxf6 2.d5 Nc5 3.dxc6 Qxd2 4.Nxd2 bxc6
>>> ² (0.40) Depth: 6 00:00:00 95kN
>>>1.Bxf6 Bxf6 2.d5 Nc5 3.Rad1 cxd5 4.b4 Na6 5.cxd5
>>> ² (0.42) Depth: 7 00:00:00 112kN
>>>1.Bxf6 Bxf6 2.d5 Nc5 3.Rad1 cxd5 4.b4 Ne4 5.Qxd5 Qxd5 6.Rxd5
>>> ² (0.34) Depth: 8 00:00:01 207kN
>>>1.Rxe6 fxe6 2.Re1 Qb6 3.b3 Rad8 4.Rxe6 Rd6 5.Qe3
>>> ² (0.48) Depth: 8 00:00:01 260kN
>>>1.Rxe6 fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd6 3.Bf4 Qd7 4.Ne5 Qd8 5.Bh6 Bxh6 6.Qxh6 Qxd4
>>> ² (0.48) Depth: 9 00:00:02 452kN
>>>1.Rxe6 fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd6 3.Bf4 Qd7 4.Ng5 Bh6 5.Nxe6 Bxf4 6.Nxf4
>>> ² (0.54) Depth: 10 00:00:03 796kN
>>>1.Rxe6 fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd6 3.Bf4 Qd7 4.Ng5 Bh6 5.Nxe6 Bxf4 6.Nxf4 Red8 7.Ne6
>>> ² (0.48) Depth: 11 00:00:07 1568kN
>>>hall,o - Junior 7
>>>r2qr1k1/pp2ppbp/2p1nnp1/6B1/2PP4/5N1P/PPBQ1PP1/R3R1K1 w - - 0 1
>>>
>>>Analysis by Gambit Tiger 2.0:
>>>
>>>1.Bxf6 Bxf6 2.d5 Nc5 3.dxc6 Qxd2 4.Nxd2 bxc6
>>> ² (0.40) Depth: 6 00:00:00 95kN
>>>1.Bxf6 Bxf6 2.d5 Nc5 3.Rad1 cxd5 4.b4 Na6 5.cxd5
>>> ² (0.42) Depth: 7 00:00:00 112kN
>>>1.Bxf6 Bxf6 2.d5 Nc5 3.Rad1 cxd5 4.b4 Ne4 5.Qxd5 Qxd5 6.Rxd5
>>> ² (0.34) Depth: 8 00:00:01 207kN
>>>1.Rxe6 fxe6 2.Re1 Qb6 3.b3 Rad8 4.Rxe6 Rd6 5.Qe3
>>> ² (0.48) Depth: 8 00:00:01 260kN
>>>1.Rxe6 fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd6 3.Bf4 Qd7 4.Ne5 Qd8 5.Bh6 Bxh6 6.Qxh6 Qxd4
>>> ² (0.48) Depth: 9 00:00:02 452kN
>>>1.Rxe6 fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd6 3.Bf4 Qd7 4.Ng5 Bh6 5.Nxe6 Bxf4 6.Nxf4
>>> ² (0.54) Depth: 10 00:00:03 796kN
>>>1.Rxe6 fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd6 3.Bf4 Qd7 4.Ng5 Bh6 5.Nxe6 Bxf4 6.Nxf4 Red8 7.Ne6
>>> ² (0.48) Depth: 11 00:00:07 1568kN
>>
>>That is quite a beautiful move.
>>
>>Beowulf plays the cowardly (in comparison):
>>g5e3 g8f8 d2c1 d8d7 g1h2 a8d8 c4c5 h7h6 f3e5 d7d5
>>
>>But I am relieve to see that Phalanx (which has a propensity for brilliant moves
>>from time to time) plays the same dull move (with a much better plan):
>> 11 106 28454 53104772 Bg5-e3 Qd8-c7 Ra1-d1 Pb7-b5 Pb2-b3 Ra8-b8
>> Rd1-b1 Pb5xc4 Pb3xc4 Pc6-c5 Pd4-d5 Ne6-f8
>>
>>As does ExChess:
>> 13. 0.59 412 144845525 1. Be3 Nf8 2. Rad1 Qc8 3. Bf4 Ne6 4. Be5 Nd7 5.
>>Bh2 c5 6. dxc5 Rd8 7. Be5 Nexc5
>>
>>And Amy:
>>13 5:40 +0.384 1. Be3 Qc7 2. Qb4 b6 3. Qa3 Rad8 4. Bd3 Nd7 5. Re2 c5 6.
>> d5
>> 13 38 3400771924835 1. Be3 Qc7 2. Qb4 b6 3. Qa3 Rad8 4. Bd3 Nd7 5.
>>Re2 c5 6. d5
>>13 7:22 +0.384 1. Be3 Qc7 2. Qb4 b6 3. Qa3 Rad8 4. Bd3 Nd7 5. Re2 c5 6.
>> d5
>> 13 38 4425895899769 1. Be3 Qc7 2. Qb4 b6 3. Qa3 Rad8 4. Bd3 Nd7 5.
>>Re2 c5 6. d5
>>
>>And Bringer:
>>bm Rxe6;
>>============ Weiß / white am Zug / to move ===
>> sT . . sD sT . sK .
>> sB sB . . sB sB sL sB
>> . . sB . sS sS sB .
>> . . . . . . wL .
>> . . wB wB . . . .
>> . . . . . wS . wB
>> wB wB wL wD . wB wB .
>> wT . . . wT . wK .
>>target response time (ms): -1
>>max. response time (ms): -1
>>Static score: mat = 5, pos = 54, total = 59
>>0:00:00.1 ( 6/12) 16093 0.52 g5-e3 d8-d6 f3-e5 f6-d7 e5xd7 d6xd7
>>0:00:00.3 ( 7/14) 58838 0.60 g5-e3 d8-d6 c4-c5 d6-d5 c2-b3 d5-e4
>>0:00:01.2 ( 8/14) 226263 0.45 g5-e3 d8-d6 d2-c3 a8-d8 c4-c5 d6-d5
>>0:00:03.2 ( 9/16) 619151 0.51 g5-e3 d8-d6 c4-c5 d6-c7
>>0:00:11.2 (10/17) 2018162 0.46 g5-e3 d8-c7
>>0:00:41.4 (11/24) 7827912 0.49 g5-e3 d8-c7 d2-d3 a8-d8
>>0:01:01.8 (12/24) 11640244 0.45 g5-e3 d8-c7 d2-d3 a8-d8 d3-a3 b7-b6
>>a1-d1 e8-f8 a3-b3 c6-c5 d4-d5 e6-f4
>>
>> 1. g5-e3
>>
>>
>>Crafty [on the other hand] goes for the pedestrian:
>>12-> 3:16 0.58 1. Bh4 Nh5 2. Rad1 Qc7 3. Qe3 c5 4.
>> d5 Nd4 5. Ba4 Nf5 6. Qg5 Nxh4 7. Nxh4
>>
>>As does Yace:
>> 37523348 1:56.2 0.45 10. 1.Bh4 Nh5 2.Rad1 Qc7
>> 102236489 5:26.9 0.50 11t 1.Bh4 a5 2.Rad1 Qb6 3.b3 Red8 4.Bg3 Nd7 5.Qe3H
>> Qb4H {HT} {10}
>>
>>
>>Gambit Tiger's move is definitely the most sexy of the lot.
>>However, all the programs seem to have a pretty low opinion of their selection.
>>Only Phalanx has an eval over one pawn in strength estimation.
>
>CM8000 also prefers "the pedestrian". But it DOES feel pretty good about it
>(comparatively):
>
>Time Depth Score Positions Moves
>0:00 2/5 1.09 12131 15. Be3 Qd6 16. Rad1 Nd7 17. Qc3 f5
>0:00 2/5 1.16 21778 15. Bh4 Qb6 16. b3 Nh5 17. Rad1 Qc7
>0:01 2/6 1.15 62789 15. Be3 Qd6 16. Rad1 a5 17. Ng5
> Red8 18. Nxe6 Qxe6
>0:02 3/7 1.08 122767 15. Be3 Qd6 16. Rad1 Red8 17. Ng5
> Nxg5 18. Bxg5 e6
>0:06 3/8 1.13 341852 15. Be3 Qd6 16. Rad1 Red8 17. Qa5
> b6 18. Qc3 Rac8
>0:11 3/8 1.19 612722 15. Bh4 b5 16. b3 Nh5 17. Rad1
> bxc4 18. bxc4 Qd6 19. g3 Rab8
>0:27 4/9 1.17 1540127 15. Bh4 Qd7 16. Rad1 Rad8 17. Qe3
> b5 18. b3 Nh5 19. d5 cxd5 20. Rxd5
>1:01 4/10 1.08 3610156 15. Bh4 b5 16. b3 Nh5 17. Rad1
> bxc4 18. bxc4 Rb8 19. d5 cxd5 20.
> cxd5
>
>jm
It does seem pretty unclear which is the best move here, so here is what Hiarcs
7.32 thinks, followed by what it thinks after Rxe6 is played:
Hiarcs 7.32
r2qr1k1/pp2ppbp/2p1nnp1/6B1/2PP4/5N1P/PPBQ1PP1/R3R1K1 w - - 0 1
Analysis by Hiarcs 7.32:
1.Be3
± (1.00) Depth: 1 00:00:00
1.Be3 Qb6
± (0.91) Depth: 2/4 00:00:00
1.b4 Nxg5 2.Nxg5
± (0.95) Depth: 2/5 00:00:00
1.b4 Nxg5 2.Nxg5
± (0.95) Depth: 3/8 00:00:00
1.b4 Nxg5 2.Qxg5 Qd6 3.a3
± (0.71) Depth: 4/9 00:00:00
1.Be3 Qd6 2.Rad1 Rad8
± (0.78) Depth: 4/10 00:00:00
1.Be3 Qd6 2.Rad1 Rad8 3.Ne5
± (0.74) Depth: 5/13 00:00:00 8kN
1.Be3 Qd6 2.Rad1 Rad8 3.Qa5 a6
± (0.73) Depth: 6/17 00:00:00 47kN
1.Be3 Qd6
² (0.60) Depth: 7/21 00:00:02 151kN
1.Bh4 Qd7 2.Rad1 Rad8 3.b4 Nh5 4.d5
² (0.67) Depth: 7/23 00:00:06 518kN
1.Bh4 Qb6 2.Bb3 c5 3.d5 Nd4 4.Nxd4 cxd4
± (0.73) Depth: 8/25 00:00:14 1144kN
1.Bh4 b5 2.b3 Qd7 3.a4 bxc4 4.bxc4 Rad8
± (0.77) Depth: 9/27 00:00:47 3391kN
1.Bh4 Qd7 2.Rad1 Rad8 3.Qe3 Qd6 4.Bg3 Qb4 5.Bb3 c5 6.a3
± (0.72) Depth: 10/29 00:02:42 11568kN
1.Bh4 Nh5 2.d5 cxd5 3.Ba4 dxc4 4.Bxe8 Qxd2 5.Nxd2 Bxb2 6.Bd7 Bxa1 7.Rxa1 c3
8.Bxe6 fxe6
± (0.73) Depth: 11/30 00:10:56 46353kN
(Columbia 24.07.2001)
Now after Rxe6:
Hiarcs 7.32
r2qr1k1/pp2ppbp/2p1Rnp1/6B1/2PP4/5N1P/PPBQ1PP1/R5K1 b - - 0 1
Analysis by Hiarcs 7.32:
1...fxe6
³ (-0.48) Depth: 1 00:00:00
1...fxe6 2.Ne5
= (-0.02) Depth: 2/4 00:00:00
1...fxe6 2.Ne5
= (-0.02) Depth: 2/5 00:00:00
1...fxe6 2.Ne5 Qd6
= (-0.12) Depth: 3/7 00:00:00
1...fxe6 2.Re1 Qb6 3.Bb3 c5 4.dxc5 Qxc5 5.Rxe6
= (-0.08) Depth: 4/7 00:00:00
1...fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd7 3.Re1 Rad8
= (0.02) Depth: 5/13 00:00:00 8kN
1...fxe6 2.Re1 Qb6 3.b4 Rad8 4.Rxe6
= (0.13) Depth: 6/18 00:00:00 36kN
1...fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd7 3.Re1 Rad8 4.b4 Qd6 5.Qxe6+ Qxe6 6.Rxe6
= (-0.02) Depth: 7/18 00:00:01 131kN
1...fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd7 3.Re1 Rad8 4.b4 Qd6 5.Qxe6+ Qxe6 6.Rxe6
= (-0.02) Depth: 8/25 00:00:09 698kN
1...fxe6 2.Re1 Qd7 3.Qe2 Rad8 4.b4 Nh5
= (-0.05) Depth: 9/27 00:00:38 2777kN
1...fxe6 2.Re1 Qd7 3.Qe2 Rad8 4.Qe3 Nh5 5.g4 Nf6 6.Bf4 Kh8
= (-0.09) Depth: 10/29 00:03:00 12833kN
1...fxe6 2.Qe3 Qd7 3.Ne5 Qc7 4.Nd3 e5 5.dxe5 Nd7 6.e6 Nf6 7.Bf4 Qa5
= (0.06) Depth: 11/30 00:10:12 45264kN
(Columbia 24.07.2001)
As you can see, Hiarcs likes Bh4 better by +0.73 to +0.06 for Rxe6.
Chuck
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.