Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:28:27 02/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 24, 2002 at 09:45:25, Ed Schröder wrote: >On February 24, 2002 at 06:57:50, Derrick Ford wrote: > >>Did i miss it in an earlier thread? > >I wrote something here: > >http://site2936.dellhost.com/forums/1/message.shtml?215261 > >Something official is in preparation for the Rebel Home Page, so far it states: > > >Remarkable: > >1) After the matches against Arthur Yussupov and Vishy Anand and GM John van der >Wiel Rebel now even after 4 matches still keeps its unbeaten status playing >matches against strong human chess players. > >2) No draws, 4 wins all with white. > >Game-1: The super grandmaster survives a king attack, moves to an equal ending, >refuses a draw offer, overrestimates his winning chances and suddenly finds >himself in a mate net. REBEL leads the match with 1-0. > >Game-2: The super grandmaster strikes back, REBEL underestimates an upcoming >king attack, the computer fights back and is able to survive but the remaining >ending is lost. The match is in balance 1-1. > >Game-3: The perfect game. The super grandmaster beaten by a flawless king >attack, one of REBEL's best games ever. Rebel leads again, now with 2-1 and >can't lose the match anymore. > >Game-4: The super grandmaster must win and launches a king attack, REBEL defends >well and the super grandmaster is forced to go for the ending, from there the >super grandmaster teaches chess, REBEL loses track and is outplayed, a >highschool example how to play the ending. The match is over ending in 2-2, the >super grandmaster has survived or was it the computer? > >3) GM Loek van Wely about the match: You can not play your own style against the >computer, that's about close to suicide, you must play the anti-computer >strategy and be well prepared, I played about 100 games against REBEL as part of >my preparation. > > >More suited stuff for this forum: > >1) Like last year against GM van der Wiel the friendly atmosphere and >sportmanship was heartwarming. There was a small incident during game-1 about >the 3th time control, a misunderstanding between the arbiter and the 2 players, >it was solved instantly. > >The incident: 1 hour before the match it was agreed to play a different time >control, that is: 40/120, 20/60 and thereafter 30 seconds Fischer, this to avoid >time control troubles for the human as happened last year and thus lift the >match to a higher level of competition. > >When the game arrived at move 60 I wanted to change Rebel's time control to >Fischer 30 seconds. The arbiter said no, I had to wait till one of the 2 clocks >(Rebel or van Wely) would pass to 00:00. I protested because this would >seriously hurt Rebel's time control mechanism, the arbiter gave in and I was >allowed to change the time control. All happened in whisper mode. > >Then when the clock of van Wely showed 00:00 the arbiter warned van Wely that >from now on the 3th time control was also valid for him. This was quite unfair >to van Wely suddenly faced with only 30 seconds for each move. Loek van Wely >looked surprised but continued the game without saying anything. > >After the game the three of us decided this wasn't exactly a success and agreed >that for the remaining 3 games the 3th time control would start on move 60 and >not when one of the clocks showed 00:00. > >Game-2: I was horrified by Rebel's play especially 12..Rc8?? All the time Rebel >had the good move 12..Nxe5 13.dxe5 d4! with good counter play as best variation >until it moved to Rc8? with a 0.01 better score at the last moment. > >[d]r2q1rk1/pb2bpp1/1pn1p2p/2ppN3/3P1P2/2PBP1P1/PP1NQ1P1/R3K2R b KQ - 0 1 > >Still Rebel perhaps could have saved the game with 13..Nxe5 but it played >13..Bd6? and after that it is already over as nothing can stop whites king >attack. > >Juicy is 12.Bg3?! > >[d]r2q1rk1/pb2bpp1/1pn1p2p/2ppN3/3PnP2/2PBP1B1/PP1NQ1PP/R3K2R b KQ - 0 1 > >Loek van Wely about the 12.Bg3 move: I would never play such a bad move against >a human, but from experience I know most computers will take the bishop. > >My comment: there is nothing wrong taking the bishop as long as it was followed >by 13..Nxe5 14.exd5 d4! and black has excellent play and a mighty bishop pair. > > >Game-3: van Wely was impressed by Rebel's abilities to play the king attack. >Mind you, beating a 2700+ player in the area where humans are supposed to be >superior to the silicon is something truly remarkable. It's like riding the >perfect golden race at the Olympics, in this case the perfect game. I am as >proud on this game as a little child can be getting his first diploma at school >tying his shoelaces in a bow. > >There were so many good moves in this game I can hardly say which one was the >best, there was: > >[d]r2qk2r/3nbppp/npp1p3/p2pP3/P2P4/1N2BN2/1PP1QPPP/R4RK1 w kq - 0 1 > >14.Rfc1! (going for 15.c4) > > >[d]rn1q1rk1/4bppp/npp1p3/p3P3/P1RP4/1N2BN2/1P2QPPP/R5K1 w - - 0 1 > >16.Nbd2! (going for Ne4 preparing the king attack) > > >[d]r2q1rk1/4bppp/npp1p3/p3P3/PnRPN3/4BN2/1P2QPPP/R5K1 w - - 0 1 > >18.Nfd2! (making space for the white queen to g4) > > >[d]r2q1r1k/2n1bppp/1pp1p3/p3P3/PnRPN1Q1/4B3/1P1N1PPP/R5K1 w - - 0 1 > >20.Ra3! (destination h3) > > >[d]r2q1r1k/2n1b2p/1pp1pp2/p2n2B1/P1RPN1Q1/R7/1P1N1PPP/6K1 w - - 0 1 > >23.Rh3! (spectacular of course but nothing serious for a computer) > > >[d]r3q2k/2n1br1p/4pp1B/1p1n4/p2PN2Q/7R/1P1N1PPP/2R3K1 w - e6 0 1 > >28.Rg3! (the only move to make progress, I was pleased as Punch with this move) > > >[d]4q2k/2n1br1p/4pp1B/1p1n4/3PN2Q/r5R1/3N1PPP/2R3K1 w - e6 0 1 > >30.Nf3!! > >For me this was the best move of the game, it came at the very last moment. All >the time Rebel was going for the (also good) 30.Nb3 + Nc5 plan but 30.Nf3 going >directly for the black king is much more effective. 30.Nf3 opens the door for >all kind of tactical shots with Ne5. > >When I saw the move I was horrified, I thought Rebel had blew it as the move >looks so unnatural while 30.Nb3 + Nc5 seemed so obvious. Same feelings in the >analysis room, everybody thought 30.Nf3 was a bad idea. Later of course the >opinions changed as true strength of 30.Nf3!! became clear. > > >[d]4q2k/2n1br1p/4pp1B/3n3Q/1p1PN3/r4NR1/5PPP/2R3K1 b - e6 0 1 > >31...Rxf3 (desperation) > >After the game I asked Loek why not 31...Lf8! > >He looked suprised, showed me the position after all the exchanges and said, >"this is a lost ending, I am not going to play a lost ending". That's how the >giants of chess think folks! They don't think in scores like 1.35 (Rebel's >evaluation), they don't even consider moves like 31...Bf8! The question is if Rebel can win against other chess programs after 31...Bf8 Are there volunteers to test it by comp-comp games? Uri > >The organizers were very pleased with the progress of the match, no boring >draws, human and silicon bloodshed all over the place, each day. The organizers >already have big plans for next year making it a yearly fixed event. > >My thanks go to Loek van Wely who was willing to risk his reputation to play >Rebel. I wish him my very best in his chess career. > >Thanks also go to the organizers Jan van Reek, Daan Brorens and others. Jan van >Reek was responsible for all analysis on the main-site, Jan is a known person in >the chess world, many chess books come from his hand. > >Special thanks to Geurt Gijssen the arbiter, Geurt is a truly amazing man, he >travels all over the world being the arbiter of many important GM tournaments, >Geurt was the only accepted arbiter for the famous Kasparov-Karpov matches, his >stories about the heroes of chess during our conversations were truly >entertaining. > >Chess is fun... > >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.