Author: Torstein Hall
Date: 10:50:25 09/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2001 at 13:10:25, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 09, 2001 at 12:26:35, Torstein Hall wrote: > >>After the following moves we reach this position: >> >> >>Kasparov,G (2851) - Shirov,A (2751) [C11] >>Fujitsu-Siemens Giants Frankfurt GER (3), 23.06.2000 >>[Fritz 6 (180s)] >> >>C11: French: Classical System: 4 e5 and 4 Bg5 dxe4 >> 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Nbd7 6.Nf3 Be7 7.Nxf6+ Bxf6 8.h4 >>0-0 9.Bd3 c5 10.Qe2 cxd4 11.Qe4 g6 12.0-0-0 Qa5 13.Bxf6 Nxf6 14.Qxd4 Nh5 15.a3 >>Rd8 16.Qe3 Bd7 17.g4 Nf6 18.Qf4 Nd5 19.Qh6 Nf6 20.Ng5 Bc6 21.Bxg6 hxg6 22.Nxe6 >>fxe6 23.Qxg6+ Kh8 24.Qxf6+ Kh7 25.Rhe1 Rxd1+ 26.Rxd1 Qc5 27.g5+- Rf8 28.Qh6+ Kg8 >>29.Qxe6+ Kg7 30.Qh6+ Kg8 31.Qg6+ Kh8 32.Qh6+ Kg8 >> >>[D]5rk1/pp6/2b4Q/2q3P1/7P/P7/1PP2P2/2KR4 w - - 0 33 >> >>When Fritz has the gamescore it wants to play 33.Rd6 whish probably wins, but >>takes a lot longer. If the game score is not given to Fritz it want to play >>33.Qe6+ like Kasparov did. This must be a repetition bug?! > >No >This is no bug >Fritz was designed to play games and not to analyze them. Perhaps thats right, but why is it behaving better when analysing than playing! So perhaps bug is not the right word, lets say that Fritz has "Very bad position repetition recognision code, in fact so bad that many rightly would call it a bug!" Torstein > >In a game Fritz is not going to miss 30.Rd6 so this problem is not relavent. > >note that I know about a repetition bug of Fritz6 and Fritz6a drew a >correspondence game with Steve Ham because of a repetition bug. >Fritz evaluated itself as better but let Steve Ham to get a draw by repetition >because of the bug. > >I do not know if Fritz could win without the bug because it had no plan but the >bug helped Steve Ham to get an easy draw. > >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.