Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Rebel's anti-GM option

Author: Ed Schröder

Date: 01:39:45 06/24/98

Go up one level in this thread


>Posted by Don Dailey on June 23, 1998 at 17:45:56:

>In Reply to: Re: Rebel's anti-GM option posted by Ed Schröder on June 23,
>1998 at 14:36:49:

>On June 23, 1998 at 14:36:49, Ed Schröder wrote:

>>>Posted by blass uri on June 23, 1998 at 10:27:58:

>>>your descreption in your homepage:

>>>"In Other words Rebel(using anti-GM) does not need to know the sacrifice
>>>is 100% correct for this position, Rebel smells the chance of an attack
>>>and goes for it"
>>>the example shows Rebel10(not using anti-GM) can miss Rxe6
>>>assuming I do not have a long time
>>>Uri

>>Yes and no, it depends. The anti-GM style is not about tactics. The given
>>position from my home page is just an example to show what anti-GM is able
>>to. To pick a "good" example a tactical position is usually much more
>>self-explaining than a quiet position.

>>An example of a more quiet position...

>>r2qkbnr/pp1n1ppp/2p5/4p3/3pP3/5BNP/PPPP1PP1/R1BQ1RK1 b

>>BR  ..  ..  BQ  BK  BB  BN  BR
>>BP  BP  ..  BN  ..  BP  BP  BP
>>..  ..  BP  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..
>>..  ..  ..  ..  BP  ..  ..  ..
>>..  ..  ..  BP  WP  ..  ..  ..
>>..  ..  ..  ..  ..  WB  WN  WP
>>WP  WP  WP  WP  ..  WP  WP  ..
>>WR  ..  WB  WQ  ..  WR  WK  ..

>>01:26  09.36  0.00  g8-f6 d2-d3 d7-c5 f3-g4 d8-b6 (R10)
>>00:48  09.36  0.07  d4-d3 b2-b3 d3-c2 d1-c2 d7-c5 (R10 + anti-GM)

>>The above is a game fragment of one of Rebel's games at Aegon 1989.
>>Rebel then played the (IMO) ugly 1..d3 Of course the move has advantages
>>but personally I clearly prefer the quiet 1..Nf6 (do not attack while
>>you are behind in development)

>>Rebel since 1989 has always been in love with this 1..d3 move. Only after
>>a deeper search Rebel switches to 1..Nf6 However Rebel10 using anti-GM
>>will deepen its love for 1..d3 even more and never will switch to 1..Nf6
>>as it fits in the principals of the anti-GM style.

>>I guess I have to live with it. I am curious what other programs play.

>>- Ed -

>Hi Ed,

>Can you tell me what the anti-GM principles are?  Are they general
>to anti-human or they aimed specifically at Grandmasters?

Hi Don,

I would say both see my comments about Aegon in another posting. I found
some patterns how GM's play against computers known as anti-COMP play and
now I like to shoot back with anti-GM :)

The anti-GM option is NOT the 7th world wonder (yet?!). It's a new
development and like every new development (learning comes to mind) it
will take years to improve.

Since it's my intention to organize such matches once a year the anti-GM
principals will have my further attention and will be improved for the
future as otherwise you have no chance at all against giants like Anand.

>Here are a couple anti-human algorithms I have used, I don't know
>how useful they are but they seem to help slightly:

>  1. Computer gets bonus for 1st and 2nd pawn exchanges (to get
>     active play)

>  2. Computer gets anti-trade-down bonus to encourage pieces to
>     stay on the board.

>  3. Computer gets penalty for pawn rams (pawns butting heads)

Thanks for hints :)

>Both must be pretty small so as to not encourage stupid moves
>but only give a general direction to "break ties."

>I have not thought deeply about others.  I am interested in yours
>if you can share them, or others people may have.

>I view all of these algorithms as very slightly weakening the play
>of the computer, if I considered them optimum then the program
>would always use these algorithms.  The idea is to change the style
>slightly to favor open positions again people.

>- Don

>P.S.  Cilkchess seems to like Ngf6 in your example from 3 ply on.
>      It never considers d6.   I don't consider this as having any
>      real significant and I would trust Rebel's positional feel
>      more than Cilkchess.   It is unclear to me which is better,
>      I kind of like d6 myself!   What actually happened in the
>      Aegon game?  Did d6 prove to be a good move?

As far as I remember it was an Aegon 1989 (or 1990) game against Lex
Jongsma (dutch journalist of the Telegraaf). Lex always playing his
favorite anti-COMP opening 1.Nc3 I remember Rebel played on a slow
Archimedes RISC computer at 8 Mhz. I forgot about the end result of
the game. All I remembered I disliked 1..d3 very much so I put it in
my database and I fear it has to stay there for a few more years :)

- Ed -



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.