Author: Otello Gnaramori
Date: 02:06:01 11/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 23, 2001 at 16:31:56, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >Die neue Fritz 7a Engine opfert gerne Material, wie ich in einigen ENG-Matches >nun beobachten konnte. > >Hier ein jüngstes Beispiel (soeben gespielt, Nunn1 – Stellung 5): >Zunächst die Partie: > The new Fritz 7a Engine sacrifices gladly material how I was able to observe in some CLOSELY-Matches now. Here's the latest example (just played, Nunn1 - position 5): First of all the game: >(8) Fritz 7a – Gambit Tiger 2.0 [D36] >P600, Blitz:5' Stuttgart (1), 23.11.2001 >W=10.5 ply; 327kN/sB=10.8 ply; 169kN/s; 1 TBAs 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Sf3 e6 4.cxd5 >exd5 5.Sc3 Sf6 6.Lg5 Le7 7.Dc2 Sbd7 8.e3 0–0 9.Ld3 Te8 10.0–0 Sf8 Beide letzter >Buchzug 11.Tac1 0.29/10 16 h6 0.30/11 10 12.Lh4 (Lf4) 0.22/11 11 >12...Se4 (Ld6) 0.14/11 6 13.Lxe7 0.32/11 9 Dxe7 0.26/10 5 14.Lxe4 (Ta1) > 0.29/11 8 14...dxe4 -0.02/10 1 15.Se5 0.29/11 7 Sd7 0.06/10 5 16.Sc4 >(Dxe4) 0.25/11 8 16...Sf6 0.00/10 5 17.a3 (Se5) 0.25/10 6 17...Lf5 >(Sd5) -0.08/9 4 18.Se2 (Se5) 0.22/10 4 18...Sd5 (Ted8) -0.12/9 7 19.Sg3 > 0.25/12 9 Lh7 -0.06/9 6 20.Db3 (Ta1) 0.29/11 4 20...Tac8 (Ted8) >-0.12/9 11 21.Sd2 (Se5) 0.19/11 16 21...Tf8 -0.18/9 5 22.f3 (Tc5) >0.16/10 6 22...exf3 -0.46/10 5 23.Txf3 0.19/11 13 Sf6 (Tcd8) 0.02/9 4 >24.Da4 (Tcf1) 0.00/9 7 24...b6 (Ta8) -0.48/9 4 25.b4 (Tcf1) 0.10/9 9 >25...c5 -0.48/10 6 26.Da6 (bxc5) 0.00/9 8 26...Tc7 -0.54/9 4 27.bxc5 >0.10/8 4 bxc5 -0.52/9 3 28.Sb3 (De2) -0.09/8 3 28...cxd4 (Se4) -0.48/10 > 3 29.Txc7 -0.15/10 5 Dxc7 -0.64/9 1 30.exd4 -0.25/10 8 Tb8 (Td8) >-0.58/10 4 31.Sc5 (De2) -0.03/9 3 31...Tb2 (De7) -0.92/9 5 32.Txf6 (Sf1) > 0.00/10 6 32...gxf6 -1.08/8 0 33.Dxf6 -0.25/10 4 Tb6 -1.46/11 4 >34.Dh4 -0.40/10 3 Dd6 (Tb1+) -1.38/11 5 35.Se2 -0.37/10 3 Kf8 (Tb1+) >-1.40/10 5 36.Df4 (Sc3) -0.12/9 3 36...Dxf4 -1.65/13 15 37.Sxf4 >-0.43/10 1 Tb2 -1.54/12 5 38.Kf1 -0.53/10 2 Ta2 (a5) -1.82/12 5 39.a4 > -0.78/10 2 Lc2 -1.92/12 5 40.Sd5 -0.96/10 2 Lxa4 -2.08/11 3 41.Sc3 >-1.46/11 3 Ta1+ -2.24/12 4 42.Ke2 -1.65/12 3 Le8 (Lc6) -2.26/11 5 >43.g3 (d5) -1.12/9 2 43...a5 (Ke7) -2.68/11 6 44.Kd3 -1.37/9 2 Th1 >-2.96/12 7 45.Ke3 (d5) -1.81/10 2 45...Txh2 -3.52/12 9 46.d5 (S5a4) >-2.12/10 2 46...Th3 (Tg2) -3.38/10 2 47.Kf4 (Kf3) -1.84/10 1 47...Th5 >-3.48/9 4 48.S5e4 (Ke3) -2.03/10 1 48...Th2 (Ke7) -3.68/11 4 49.Sf6 >(Sd6) -2.06/10 2 49...Tc2 -4.16/11 4 50.Sce4 (Sxe8) -2.31/10 2 50...a4 >-5.66/11 2 51.d6 -2.96/10 1 Lc6 -6.81/11 2 52.d7 -4.03/10 3 Ke7 >-7.66/11 2 53.Sd6 -4.78/9 1 a3 (Lxd7) -9.06/9 2 54.Sf5+ -6.09/9 1 Kd8 > -11.04/12 4 55.Sxh6 -8.15/10 1 Lxd7 adjud.. (Tf2+) -11.88/11 2 0–1 > > > > >Im 32. Zug opfert Fritz 7a die Qualität! Ist das korrekt gewesen? >Vermutlich nein. Warum? Weil Fritz 7a in der Folge die Damen >tauschte und ins Endspiel einlenkte! Wenn man schon Qualität >mehr hat, dann sollte man die Schwerfiguren unbedingt auf >dem Brett halten. Leider tat Fritz 7a das nicht, und im Endspiel >bewertete er die schon hoffnungslose Lage noch gar nicht sooo >schlecht für sich, wo GT 2.0 bereits +3 für sich anzeigte. > >Hier die Analyse des Fritz 7a – Opfers > In 32nd move, Fritz 7a sacrifices the quality! Was that correct? Probably no. Why? Because Fritz 7a in the sequence where the Queens exchanged and turned in into the final game! If one has already more quality, one should hold the heavy pieces unconditionally on the board. Unfortunately Fritz 7a did not do that, and in the final game it did not evaluate the already hopeless situation yet quite sooo badly for itself where GT 2.0 indicated already + 3 for itself. Here's the analysis of the Fritz 7a – sacrifice > >Fritz 7a – Gambit Tiger 2.0 > >[D]6k1/p1q2ppb/Q4n1p/2N5/3P4/P4RN1/1r4PP/6K1 w - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Fritz 7a: > > >32.Txf6 gxf6 33.Dxf6 Tb1+ 34.Kf2 Da5 35.De5 Dd2+ 36.Kf3 Dd1+ 37.Kf4 Lg6 38.d5 >Dc1+ 39.De3 > = (-0.15) Tiefe: 10/30 00:00:04 1281kN >32.Dc4 > = (-0.12) Tiefe: 10/32 00:00:11 3766kN >32.Dc4 Tb1+ 33.Tf1 Df4 34.Txb1 Lxb1 35.Dc3 Sd5 36.Dc4 De3+ 37.Kf1 Sf4 > ³ (-0.31) Tiefe: 11/32 00:00:21 7035kN >32.Txf6 > ³ (-0.28) Tiefe: 11/34 00:00:22 7674kN >32.Txf6 gxf6 33.Dxf6 Tb1+ 34.Kf2 Da5 35.De5 Dd2+ 36.Kf3 Dd1+ 37.Se2 Ld3 38.De8+ >Kg7 > = (-0.15) Tiefe: 11/34 00:00:24 8233kN >32.Txf6 gxf6 33.Dxf6 Tb1+ 34.Kf2 Da5 35.De5 Dd2+ 36.Kf3 Lg6 37.Se2 Tf1+ > ³ (-0.28) Tiefe: 12/35 00:00:40 13699kN >32.Txf6 gxf6 33.Dxf6 Tb1+ 34.Kf2 Lg6 35.Kf3 Tb2 36.d5 Tc2 37.Sce4 Lxe4+ > ³ (-0.40) Tiefe: 13/38 00:02:12 44660kN > >Diesen Damentausch (Df4) hätte Fritz 7 unbedingt vermeiden müssen, >und er hätte es auch getan, wenn es nicht Blitz gewesen wäre. Frage: >Ist diese weise Stellung zu halten? Fritz 7a analysiert es so: > This Queens exchange (Df4) of Fritz 7 should be unconditionally avoided, also if it was not a Blitz game. I would ask: this wise position is to be held? Fritz 7a analyzes it so: >Fritz 7a – Gambit Tiger 2.0 > >[D]5k2/p4p1b/1r1q3p/2N5/3P3Q/P7/4N1PP/6K1 w - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Fritz 7a: > >36.Df4! > = (-0.21) Tiefe: 8/23 00:00:00 197kN >36.Df4! > = (0.00) Tiefe: 8/23 00:00:00 218kN >36.Df4 Dxf4 37.Sxf4 Tb2 38.g4 Ta2 39.Sd5 Txa3 40.Sf6 Ld3 > ³ (-0.28) Tiefe: 9/21 00:00:01 366kN >36.Sc3 > = (-0.25) Tiefe: 9/28 00:00:02 762kN >36.Kf1 > = (-0.21) Tiefe: 9/28 00:00:03 1035kN >36.Kf1 Tb1+ 37.Kf2 Tb2 38.Kf1 Lc2 39.Sc3 Kg7 40.Dg4+ Lg6 41.Kg1 Df6 > = (-0.25) Tiefe: 10/25 00:00:04 1417kN >36.Kf1 Tb1+ 37.Kf2 Tb2 38.Kf1 > = (-0.25) Tiefe: 11/28 00:00:07 2341kN >36.Kf1 Tb2 37.a4 Kg8 38.Dg4+ Lg6 39.Df4 Dd5 40.Dg3 Tb1+ 41.Kf2 a5 42.De5 Dd8 > ³ (-0.40) Tiefe: 12/30 00:00:33 11482kN > >In der nächsten Partie kam es zu einem Endspiel wo sich Tiger wieder bereits mit >+3 Bauern vorne sah (Fritz 7a sah sich da anfangs nur leicht im Nachteil), aber >am Ende (kaum zu glauben) gab es tatsächlich ein Remis (Elementarstellung)! > >Ich meine jedoch dass GT 2.0 im Endspiel hätte besser fortsetzen können, und >dass seine Bewertung eher zutraf als die von Fritz 7a........... Ok. Alles nur >Blitzpartien, aber dennoch. > >Hier zunächst diese Partie: In the next game there was a final game where tiger again already with + 3 ahead (Fritz 7a saw itself only slightly in the disadvantage), but at the end (unbelievable) there was actually a draw (elementary position)! I think however that GT 2.0 in the final game should have better continuation and that its estimation would be sooner better than that of Fritz 7a.......... Ok. All only blitz games, but nevertheless. Here first of all this game: > >(9) Gambit Tiger 2.0 - Fritz 7a [D36] >P600, Blitz:5' Stuttgart (2), 23.11.2001 >W=12.0 ply; 155kN/s; 48.327 TBAsB=11.7 ply; 322kN/s; 9.145 TBAs 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 >3.Sf3 e6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Sc3 Sf6 6.Lg5 Le7 7.Dc2 Sbd7 8.e3 0–0 9.Ld3 Te8 10.0–0 >Sf8 Beide letzter Buchzug 11.Tfe1 0.58/8 9 Se4 0.28/10 10 12.Lf4 0.42/10 >6 f5 (Lb4) 0.09/10 12 13.a4 (Lg3) 0.24/8 4 13...Da5 (Ld6) 0.00/10 15 >14.h3 0.24/8 4 Sg6 -0.04/10 8 15.Lh2 0.08/9 4 Le6 0.00/10 9 16.Tec1 >(Se5) 0.04/8 4 16...a6 (Tf8) 0.03/9 6 17.Se2 0.12/8 8 Tac8 (Db4) >0.03/10 7 18.Sf4 (Se5) 0.20/8 4 18...Sxf4 0.00/10 7 19.Lxf4 0.12/10 9 >Db4 (g6) 0.00/10 7 20.Le5 (Ta3) 0.14/8 7 20...Da5 (Ld8) 0.00/10 4 >21.Td1 (Lf4) 0.18/9 6 21...Lf7 (g6) 0.03/10 12 22.Lf4 0.24/8 4 Lh5 >-0.04/10 7 23.Tdc1 0.06/9 10 Lb4 (Dd8) -0.10/9 5 24.b3 (Se5) 0.18/9 11 > 24...c5 (Tf8) -0.22/8 14 25.dxc5 0.28/9 8 Txc5 -0.35/9 4 26.Dd1 >0.10/10 3 Lc3 -0.35/9 7 27.Ta2 0.10/9 4 Db4 (Db6) -0.38/8 4 28.Le2 >0.26/8 3 Lf7 -0.13/8 4 29.Tac2 0.16/9 4 Dxb3 -0.25/9 5 30.Tb1 (Sg5) >0.04/9 3 30...Dxa4 -0.75/10 8 31.Txb7 -0.18/10 21 Lf6 (Tec8) -0.75/8 3 > 32.Txc5 (Ld3) -0.12/10 2 32...Dxd1+ -0.41/9 0 33.Lxd1 0.10/10 0 Sxc5 >-0.44/9 0 34.Ta7 -0.20/11 6 Lh5 -0.41/9 3 35.Le2 (Ld6) -0.18/10 3 >35...g5 (Tc8) -0.47/9 3 36.Ld6 0.02/10 3 Se4 (Tc8) -0.32/10 6 37.Txa6 >(Lc7) 0.12/9 2 37...g4 -0.54/8 2 38.Sh2 (hxg4) 0.02/10 4 38...Te6 >(Sxd6) -0.38/8 3 39.hxg4 0.48/11 2 fxg4 -0.16/10 4 40.Ta8+ 0.46/11 3 >Kf7 0.00/10 3 41.Lf4 0.52/10 2 Tb6 (Tc6) 0.00/9 2 42.Tb8 (Sxg4) >0.64/10 3 42...Tc6 0.00/10 3 43.Tb7+ (Sxg4) 0.68/10 5 43...Kg6 (Le7) >-0.25/9 1 44.Sf1 (Tb5) 0.88/9 2 44...Tc1 (Lh4) -0.19/9 2 45.Td7 (Ld3) >1.32/10 2 45...Lh4 (Lg5) 0.40/9 1 46.g3 1.38/11 2 Lg5 0.62/10 2 >47.Txd5 1.52/10 2 Lxf4 (Kh6) 0.75/9 1 48.exf4 1.20/11 3 Kh6 (Sf6) >0.87/11 2 49.Kg2 1.52/11 2 Le8 (Te1) 1.03/10 3 50.Se3 2.18/11 3 Lc6 >1.00/10 2 51.Sf5+ (Sxg4+) 2.38/12 3 51...Kg6 1.31/11 2 52.Se7+ 2.50/12 >3 Kh6 1.31/11 2 53.Sxc6 2.48/11 2 Txc6 1.25/11 1 54.Lxg4 3.04/12 3 >Sf6 1.31/11 1 55.Tg5 3.06/11 2 Td6 (Sxg4) 1.46/11 2 56.Le2 3.26/10 2 >Td4 (Tc6) 1.50/11 2 57.f3 (Te5) 3.38/10 2 57...Sd5 (Td2) 1.50/10 1 >58.Kf2 3.36/12 2 Td2 1.56/12 2 59.Te5 3.36/12 2 Kg7 (Sc3) 1.59/11 2 >60.Ke1 3.48/13 2 Td4 1.81/11 1 61.Te4 3.60/12 1 Tb4 1.78/11 2 62.Lc4 > 3.62/11 3 Se3 (Sf6) 1.84/10 2 63.Ld3 3.62/11 1 Sd5 1.78/11 2 64.Txb4 >(Te5) 3.72/13 1 64...Sxb4 1.78/11 0 65.Le4 3.62/14 3 h6 2.00/13 3 >66.Ke2 3.50/13 2 Kf6 2.06/12 1 67.f5 (g4) 3.50/12 1 67...Sa2 2.12/12 >1 68.Kd2 3.36/11 1 h5 2.15/12 0 69.g4 3.38/11 1 hxg4 2.18/12 0 >70.fxg4 3.32/10 0 Kg5 (Sb4) 2.18/13 1 71.Ke3 (Lf3) 3.30/11 1 71...Sc3 >2.21/13 2 72.Kd4 3.90/12 1 Sa4 2.53/13 1 73.Ke5 3.90/12 1 Sc5 >2.25/13 0 74.Lf3 3.48/13 1 Sd7+ 2.15/13 0 75.Ke6 3.52/14 1 Sf6 >2.06/14 1 76.Kf7 3.42/13 1 Sh7 (Sd7) 2.18/15 1 77.Ld1 (Ke7) 3.52/14 1 >77...Sf6 2.06/15 0 78.Le2 (Ke6) 3.42/14 1 78...Sd5 (Sd7) 2.06/14 0 >79.Lf3 3.42/14 1 Sf6 2.12/14 0 80.Kf8 3.42/14 0 Sh7+ (Sd7+) 2.15/14 0 > 81.Ke7 2.96/15 1 Sf6 2.12/14 0 82.Ld1 (Le2) 3.16/14 1 82...Sd5+ (Se4) >2.09/13 0 83.Ke6 2.96/14 1 Sf4+ (Sf6) 2.06/12 0 84.Kf7 (Ke5) 3.22/14 0 > 84...Sd5 2.09/15 0 85.Le2 (Kg7) 2.96/14 0 85...Sf6 2.15/14 0 86.Ke6 >3.02/14 0 Sh7 (Se8) 2.09/14 0 87.Ld1 3.00/14 0 Sf6 2.12/14 0 88.Lf3 >(Kd6) 2.96/15 2 88...Se8 (Sg8) 2.06/13 0 89.Kd7 (Le2) 2.96/14 0 >89...Sf6+ 2.09/13 0 90.Ke7 (Kd6) 2.96/14 0 90...Sg8+ 1.93/13 0 91.Kd6 >3.04/14 0 Kf6 2.00/13 0 92.Kd5 2.86/14 1 Sh6 2.00/13 0 93.Ke4 >2.92/13 0 Kg5 (Sf7) 2.09/13 0 94.Ke5 2.56/14 0 Sg8 1.93/14 0 95.Ld1 >2.92/15 0 Sf6 1.90/14 0 96.Le2 2.84/14 0 Sd7+ (Se8) 1.93/13 0 97.Ke6 >(Kd6) 2.38/14 0 97...Sc5+ (Sf6) 1.90/12 0 98.Kd6 (Ke7) 2.78/12 0 >98...Se4+ 1.87/12 0 99.Ke5 (Kd7) 2.68/13 0 99...Sf6 1.93/13 0 100.Ld1 >(Kd4) 2.62/13 0 100...Sd7+ (Se8) 1.84/12 0 101.Kd6 (Kd5) 2.43/14 0 >101...Sf6 1.81/13 0 102.Ke6 (Kc6) 2.38/13 0 102...Se4 (Sg8) 2.03/12 0 >103.Ke7 (Kd5) 2.18/14 0 103...Sf6 1.84/13 0 104.Le2 Remis angenommen. >adjud. 2.26/13 0 ½–½ > > >Im Zug 65 spielte Fritz 7a h6 und sah sich nur etwa 2 Bauern hinten, während GT >2.0 da schon +3,60 für sich sah. > In the move 65, Fritz 7a played h6 and saw itself only about 2 behind while GT 2.0 saw there already +3,60 for itself. >Gambit Tiger 2.0 - Fritz 7a > >[D]8/6kp/8/8/1n2BP2/5PP1/8/4K3 b - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Fritz 7a: > >65...h6 66.Kd2 Sa6 67.g4 Sc5 68.Ke3 Kf6 69.Ld5 Sa6 70.Kd4 Sc7 > +- (1.96) Tiefe: 11/19 00:00:00 270kN >65...h6 66.g4 Sa6 67.Kd2 Sc5 68.Ke3 Kf6 69.Ld5 Sa6 70.Ke4 Sc7 71.f5 > +- (2.03) Tiefe: 12/21 00:00:01 367kN >65...h6 66.g4 Sa6 67.Kd2 Sc5 68.Ke3 Kf6 69.Ld5 Sa6 > +- (2.06) Tiefe: 13/20 00:00:01 592kN, tb=2 >65...h6 66.g4 Sa6 67.Kd2 Sc5 68.Ke3 Kf6 69.Ld5 Sa6 70.Kd4 Sc7 71.Ke4 Sb5 72.Ke3 >Sc3 > +- (2.03) Tiefe: 14/22 00:00:02 994kN, tb=6 >65...h6 66.g4 Sa6 67.Kd2 Kf6 68.Ke3 Sc7 69.f5 Sb5 70.f4 Sc3 71.Kd3 Sd1 72.Kd4 >Sf2 > +- (2.03) Tiefe: 15/22 00:00:04 1437kN, tb=19 >65...h6 66.g4 Sa6 67.Kd2 Kf6 68.Ke3 Sc7 69.f5 Sb5 70.f4 Sc3 71.Kd3 Sb5 72.Kc4 > +- (2.12) Tiefe: 16/25 00:00:06 2316kN, tb=54 >65...h6 66.g4 Sa6 67.Kd2 Kf6 68.f5 Sc7 69.Kd3 Ke5 70.Ke3 Sb5 71.Lc6 Sc3 72.Kd2 >Sb1+ > +- (2.12) Tiefe: 17/27 00:00:12 4206kN, tb=119 >65...h6 66.g4 Sa6 67.Kd2 Kf6 68.f5 Sc7 69.Kd3 Ke5 70.Ke3 Sb5 71.Lc6 Sc3 72.Kd2 >Sb1+ > +- (2.09) Tiefe: 18/29 00:00:35 11729kN, tb=650 >65...h6 66.g4 Sa6 67.Kd2 Kf6 68.f5 Sc7 69.Lc6 Kg5 70.Ke3 Sa6 71.f4+ Kf6 72.Le4 >Sb4 > +- (2.18) Tiefe: 19/31 00:00:53 17551kN, tb=1023 > >Und hier die Endstellung (ich habe abgebrochen) wo beide etwa +2 für weiss >sehen, die Stellung ist dennoch Remis: > And here is the end position (I have interrupted it) where both are about + 2 , the position is anyway a draw: >[D]8/4K3/5n2/5Pk1/6P1/8/4B3/8 b - - 0 1 > > >Frage: >Ist der neue Fritz 7a ein Träumer, oder eher ein realistischer Optimist? > >In der ersten gezeigten Partie war das Opfer interessant, aber: >War das Opfer zu optimistisch oder nicht? > >In der zweiten gezeigten Partie bewertete Fritz 7a das Endspiel >"Anfangs" noch so als ob es haltbar gewesen wäre. > >War das auch zu optimistisch oder nicht? > >Immerhin "führt" Fritz 7a in diesem Nunn1-Match derzeit mit 6,5-2,5 (eine Partie >aus Runde 4 wird noch nachgeholt werden)! > >Eduard I Would ask: the new Fritz 7a is a dreamer, or sooner a real optimist? In the first shown games the sacrifice interesting, but wasn't the sacrifice too optimistic ? In the second shown game Fritz 7a evaluated the final game "Anfangs" yet so as if it would have been durable. Was not that also too optimistic ? Fritz 7a in this Nunn1-Match nevertheless "leads" will yet be made up presently with 6,5-2,5 (a game out of round 4)! Eduard
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.