Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:00:44 09/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 07, 2001 at 01:32:29, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>On September 06, 2001 at 15:35:37, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On September 06, 2001 at 14:47:08, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>
>>>On September 06, 2001 at 03:14:19, Eduard Nemeth wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 06, 2001 at 01:56:05, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On September 05, 2001 at 23:17:46, Eduard Nemeth wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On September 05, 2001 at 04:08:14, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On September 05, 2001 at 02:48:19, Eduard Nemeth wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Today the "Ruy Lopez-dance"!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>:-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>After move 3:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>[D]r1bqkbnr/pppp1pp1/2n5/1B2p2p/4P3/5N2/PPPP1PPP/RNBQK2R w KQkq -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>[Event "Blitz30',P600,128MB"]
>>>>>>>>[Site "Stuttgart"]
>>>>>>>>[Date "2001.??.??"]
>>>>>>>>[Round "?"]
>>>>>>>>[White "Deep Shredder"]
>>>>>>>>[Black "Nemeth"]
>>>>>>>>[ECO "C60"]
>>>>>>>>[Result "0-1"]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>1. e4 {Buch 0s} e5 {1s (c5)} 2. Nf3 {Buch 0s} Nc6 {9s}
>>>>>>>>3. Bb5 {Buch 1s} h5 {1s (a6)} 4. O-O {+0.91/12 38s} d6 {6s
>>>>>>>>(Sf6)} 5. d4 {+0.97/10 10s} Bg4 {13s (Ld7)} 6. dxe5
>>>>>>>>{+1.65/10 15s} Nh6 {14s (Dd7)} 7. h3 {+2.37/10 33s} g6 {9s
>>>>>>>>(Ld7)} 8. hxg4 {+2.71/11 42s} hxg4 {4s} 9. Qd5 {+6.12/11
>>>>>>>>38s} Bg7 {3s} 10. Nd4 {+6.25/11 1:10m} Qh4 {5s (O-O)}
>>>>>>>>11. g3 {+5.25/9 7:14m} Qh3 {24s (Dh5)} 12. Bxc6+ {+4.55/7
>>>>>>>>25s} Kf8 {16s} 13. Be8 {+1.03/8 58s} Rxe8 {9s} 14. Ne6+
>>>>>>>>{-9.85/8 46s} fxe6 {25s} 15. Qc6 {-M17/8 20s} Nf5 {23s
>>>>>>>>(Sg8)} 16. Bh6 {-M3/11 24s} Rxh6 {2s (Dxh6)} 17. Qxe8+
>>>>>>>>{-M2/12 22s} Kxe8 {1s} 18. b4 {-M1/11 19s} Qh1# {4s (Dh2+)}
>>>>>>>>0-1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Mate:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>[D]4k3/ppp3b1/3pp1pr/4Pn2/1P2P1p1/6P1/P1P2P2/RN3RKq w - -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Lets dance!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>:-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Eduard
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Deep Fritz disagree with Deep shredder's moves and evaluations
>>>>>>>10.Bg5 seems to be a simple win for white when 11.g3 seems to be
>>>>>>>a clearly losing move.
>>>>>>>Deep Fritz can see g3 Qh3 after 9 seconds in the main line on p800
>>>>>>>but it seems that Deep shredder can see nothing even after 7 minutes on
>>>>>>>pentium600 and even expects the wrong move.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>Hello Uri,
>>>
>>>>>>Hello Uri!
>>>>>>When You makes an analysis, then you must this makes with this PROGRAM
>>>>>>what here play, and not with an another program - this only my opinion!
>>>>>
>>>>>I wanted to find the losing mistake of Shredder.
>>>>
>>>>Ok.!
>>>>
>>>>When I play a game with a trojaner then is the trojaner not always correct!
>>>>I know this. I know that Shredder is tactical NOT so good like FRITZ !
>>>
>>>Well, I can tell you that the new version has been improved in tactics.
>>>>
>>>>Interesting was in this game the aspekt that SMK says that Deep Shredder
>>>>is "never" to beat with a trojaner (German: SMK hattte gesagt - sogar zu mir -
>>>>dass DS mit einem Trojaner nicht mehr zu überlisten ist). Nevertheless I
>>>>"beat" DS with an trojaner too - against S5 is this very easy! :)
>>>
>>>Well, the play against anti-trojan has been improved starting with Deep
>>>Shredder.
>>>>
>>>>>I believe that Deep Fritz is the best in tactics so I prefered to use it.
>>>>
>>>>Ok, yes this ist true, but Tiger 14 too!
>>>>
>>>>>Shredder has the most stupid evaluations that I know.
>>>>>
>>>>>It also showed more than +5 against Junior and lost the game.
>>>
>>>This is nonsense. The reason why that happened it was due to a wrong info in the
>>>program.
>
>Hi Uri,
>>
>>I know that shredder5.32 also can see the +5 evaluations.
>
>Yes, Shredder 5.32 is better than 5.0 version and Deep Shredder, but it has the
>same wrong info for passed pawns. This info increases the value of some wrong
>move in some positions where there are passed pawns. This means that the program
>may take a long time to realize this and sometime it is too late...
>
>>Sorry for saying this bad things about shredder but I usually do not
>>see programs losing after evaluating the position as +5 or
>>even +4 or +3(I know that it is possible that +5 of shredder
>>may be translated to +4 or +3 of another program)
>>for many moves in comp-comp games.
>
>Yes, +3 or +5 does not really mean anything other that the advantage should be a
>winning one. The point is that if you have 3 moves which are close and only 1 is
>correct, the program may play the wrong one. This is the problem. So, it is
>important ot avoid this.
>>
>>Shredder's evaluation may be better in other positions and
>>the most stupid evaluation does not mean to most of the cases but
>>to the biggest difference from the right position.
>
>OK, this may be true.
>>
>>It is possible that other programs are more often wrong and I say
>>what I say based on the extreme cases.
>
>OK, I agree.
>>
>> We have found out what is wrong and that will be corrected.
>>>Generally speaking the evaluations of Shredder are correct even if generally
>>>high. I am talking about the latest versions which you did not see. Shredder
>>>5.32 is the best commercially available, but the openings book is not so good.
>
>I was referring to other Shredder versions.
>>
>>I doubt it.
>>I remember that Deep Fritz beated convincingly shredder5.32 in
>>the ssdf games.
>
>Yes, but the book can do a lot.
>I just completed a match on my computers with the wider tournament book and the
>score was 16 to 9 for Shredder 5.43 (the version we used at the MWCCC) against
>Deep Fritz (+10 =12 -3) 60 minutes for game, on 2 K7 Athlon 1 GHz 512 Mega RAM.
>Generally speaking Deep Fritz is better at fast games compared to tournament
>level.
I compare between the commercial versions and not between shredder5.43 and Deep
Fritz.
I do not see a reason to believe that shredder5.32 is better than deep Fritz at
long time control.
I find that tactics is important also at long time control and Deep Fritz is
better in tactics than Shredder also at long time control.
Uri
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.