Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess Tiger annotation - you gotta love it

Author: Vine Smith

Date: 14:46:53 07/31/01

Go up one level in this thread


On July 30, 2001 at 15:39:10, John Hatcher wrote:

>Automatic game annotation in Chessbase products is a great feature, but
>sometimes the verbiage that's added to a line makes no sense - and sometimes
>it's just funny.  An example of annotation by Chess Tiger 14 (Chessbase):
>
>[D]r1b5/pp1Pkn2/2ppr2b/7p/2PP1p2/2NB3P/PP4P1/3RR1K1 w - - 0 1
>
>
>The annotation of this position by Chess Tiger reads:
>
>27. dxc8Q  Rxc8  28.  Bf5  Rxe1+  29. Rxe1+  Kd8  30.  Bxc8 +-
>
>Worse is 27. dxc8R  Rxc8  28.  Bf5  Rxe1+  29. Rxe1+  Kd8  30.  Bxc8 +-
>
>Which is a bit comical since both lines result in exactly the same position.
>Maybe it makes sense to the computer mathematcially because in the first line
>the pawn promotes to a Queen - a piece of higher value -- but the remark "worse
>is" makes no sense chessically.
>
>This game features a gutsy Queen sac by White on move 20, which must be declined
>as it leads to a long mate.  A nice bit of calulcation by White:
>
>[D]r1b2r2/pp1nqn2/2pp2kb/4Pp1p/2PP1p2/2N3BP/PPQ1B1P1/3RR1K1 w - - 0 1
>
>
>White to play:  20. Qxf5+
>
>Here's the entire game:
>
>[Event "Continental Open"]
>[Site "Las Vegas USA"]
>[Date "2001.07.29"]
>[Round "5"]
>[White "Shulman, Y."]
>[Black "Ginsburg, M."]
>[Result "1-0"]
>[ECO "E94"]
>[WhiteElo "2568"]
>[BlackElo "2400"]
>[PlyCount "53"]
>[EventDate "2001.07.26"]
>
>1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. Be3 Nbd7 8. O-O
>Qe7 9. Qc2 c6 10. Rfe1 Ng4 11. Bg5 f6 12. Bh4 h5 13. h3 Nh6 14. Rad1 Nf7 15.
>Bg3 Kh7 16. Nh4 Bh6 17. f4 exf4 18. e5 f5 19. Nxg6 Kxg6 20. Qxf5+ Kg7 21. Bd3
>Rh8 22. Qg6+ Kf8 23. e6 Rg8 24. Bh4 Rxg6 25. Bxe7+ Kxe7 26. exd7+ Re6 27.
>dxc8=Q 1-0
>
>JOHN

I would prefer that the Chessbase programs annotate in the style of Crafty, and
just give the preferred lines and game lines with evaluation scores. The
verbiage produced by Fritz and "friends" is too often ludicrously misguided. In
"The Mammoth Book of Chess" by Burgess, one can see a good example of this
starting on page 389, where Fritz 4 gets it all wrong, and its comments only
make its misunderstandings all the more ridiculous. In one game of my own that
Fritz annotated, it claimed that I was "throwing the game away", when all that
was happening was that doubled rooks were being shifted about on a file to use
up moves and get to the next time control, while the position hadn't changed in
any significant fashion.
By the way, I played in the Continental Open (under 2200 section) and was
disappointed that there were no tournament bulletins. Where did you get the game
score for Shulman-Ginsburg?

Regards,
Vine Smith



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.