Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:18:52 09/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 11, 2001 at 10:26:21, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 11, 2001 at 02:17:09, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 10, 2001 at 21:27:02, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>On September 10, 2001 at 05:56:21, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On September 10, 2001 at 05:02:43, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 10, 2001 at 00:48:34, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>32.Bg5 Bg7 33.Bf4 c4 34.Re2 Bd7 35.Rd1 Bb5 36.Ree1 Bxa4 37.bxa4 Rb2 >>>>>>>>>>>>38.Rd2 Rxa2 39.Bxf5 >>>>> >>>>>>>>Black has better earlier on: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Instead of 36. .. Bxa4 first 36. .. Nd3! >>>>>> >>>>>>It looks like White also has better earlier on: >>>>>> >>>>>>36.Bxe5! Nxe5 >>>>> >>>>>Bxe5 captures the knight, so Nxe5 is obviously impossible. I think >>>>>you are looking at the wrong line... >>>>> >>>>>36.Bxe5 Bxe5 is a straight win for black >>>> >>>>Dave meant 36.Bxe5 Bxe5 and it is not clear >>>> >>>>Here is again the relevant analysis(I added * to singular moves of black that is >>>>before move 39 and I am going to look at this position more today because I have >>>>other things to do) >>>> >>>>Thanks to dave Gomboc for doing the job. >>>>I did not look at most of the analysis for 37...Bxh2+ >>>> >>>>36.Bxe5! Bxe5* 37.Nc5! Bxh2+ 38.Kxh2 dxc5* 39.a4 Bc6* 40.Rd6 cxb3 41.Bd3 b2 >>>>42.Re1 b1Q 43.Rxb1 Rxb1 44.Bxb1 is unclear, while after 40.Re6 Kf7 41.Rde1 cxb3 >>>>42.Bd3 Bb5 43.axb5 Rxe6 44.Bc4 Rbb6 45.Bxb3 White should be able to hold the >>>>rook ending. Meanwhile, 40.Re6 Kf7 41.Rde1 Rxd7 42.b4 cxb4 43.cxb4 Rb7 44.Bd1 >>>>Rxb4 45.Bf3 Bxf3 46.Rxa6 Rb2 is wild!, I'll let someone with a faster machine >>>>handle that variation (there may be good deviations for either side along the >>>>way too). If something refutes this line, it's probably this. >>>> >>>>This leaves 36.Bxe5! Bxe5* 37.Nc5! dxc5 38.Rxe5 Rxa2* 39.bxc4 Bxc4 40.Rxc5 which >>>>looks like White should be able to grovel a draw here too. >>>> >>>>39...Bc6 40.Rxc5 Bxg2 may be an improvement for black and I did not check this >>>>line >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>I think more of the moves are singular than you are giving credit for. For >>>instance, 38.Kxh2 is an obvious case (though perhaps you were counting that as a >>>normal recapture-extension). >> >>I count only black moves and I did not count moves after move 39. >> >>Uri > > >If we are talking about SE, then both sides can be extended. I counted only black moves for the analysis. It was not to discuss about their singular extensions. There was a claim that white can draw the position and singular lines for black are lines that you do not need to search for improvements for black. You have to take >their output, ie 11(6) and use that "11 plies" as a starting point. 11(6) may be relevant for the deeper blue games but not for this game because it was Deep thought game and I understood that Deep thought searched only 10-12 plies+singular extensions Each >singular move adds 1 ply to that. Note that a move can be both singular and >out of check, and it gets extended by 2 plies. Their only extension constraint >was that two consecutive plies could not extend more than 2 plies total. IE if >you extend twice at ply N, then you could not extend by 1 on both the previous >and next moves (before and after that 2-ply extension ply). > >That kind of search can probe _very_ deeply in the right lines since SE was >not their _only_ extension. It was generally "in addition to" everything else >we all normally do. With all these extensions their search depth should be enough to see draw by repetition or material equality against kasparov at game 2 of the match. Almost all the plies that you need to see there are singular moves. The fact that they did not see the draw suggest that they did extend 1 ply for every singular move. Uri
This page took 0.04 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.