Author: Vine Smith
Date: 17:46:49 04/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 18, 2002 at 19:24:19, Slater Wold wrote: >Fritz 7 (128MB - AMD 1.73Ghz) - Deep Junior 7 (128MB - AMD 1.73Ghz) [B85] >simple (1.1), 18.04.2002 > >1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Be2 Nf6 7.Be3 Be7 8.f4 0-0 >9.0-0 a6 10.a4 Qc7 11.Kh1 Re8 12.Bf3 Nxd4 0.28/17 1:19 13.Qxd4 e5 0.27/19 >4:27 14.Qd2 exf4 15.Bxf4 Be6 16.Rad1 Rad8 0.22/18 4:53 17.Qf2 0.28/14 2:01 > Qa5 (Qc4) 0.20/17 2:50 18.Qg3 (Bd2) 0.19/14 3:24 18...h5 (Nh5) 0.14/17 >2:27 19.Bxd6 (Bd2) 0.59/14 2:22 19...Rxd6 (h4) 0.21/16 1:16 20.Rxd6 >0.63/14 42 h4 0.25/17 1:52 21.Qf4 0.56/15 2:01 Bxd6 0.34/17 2:59 >22.Qxd6 0.56/13 22 Nd7 0.31/17 1:29 23.Be2 0.50/14 2:05 Nf8 0.30/18 >2:17 24.Rd1 (Bd3) 0.56/14 2:05 24...Ng6 0.27/18 58 25.Bg4 0.63/14 1:13 >Qg5 (Bxg4) 0.43/17 1:46 26.Bxe6 0.63/14 1:44 Rxe6 0.39/17 1:27 27.Qd4 >(Qd8+) 0.59/14 2:07 27...Kh7 (Qf4) 0.31/17 1:00 28.Rf1 (Qd2) 0.66/15 >1:52 28...Nf4 (Ne5) 0.16/16 56 29.Qd2 0.69/15 2:04 Rf6 0.59/18 3:26 >30.Rf3 0.66/15 1:47 Qe5 0.47/17 1:04 31.Qf2 (Nd5) 0.66/15 1:42 31...g5 >(Qg5) 0.00/17 36 32.Qe1 (h3) 0.66/13 56 32...b5 -0.16/16 31 33.axb5 >(Qd1) 0.38/14 2:30 33...axb5 -0.21/16 1:52 34.b4 (Qd1) 0.38/13 1:13 >34...Rh6 -0.16/16 1:24 35.Nd1 (Qf1) 0.41/13 2:02 35...Ra6 (f5) -0.22/16 >1:33 36.g3 0.81/14 1:07 hxg3 -0.15/14 19 37.hxg3 0.91/14 1:37 Rh6+ >(Nh5) -0.05/14 28 38.Kg1 0.66/9 0 Nh3+ (Qd4+) 0.14/15 1:04 39.Kg2 >1.72/14 56 Qe7 (Qe6) 0.18/16 2:33 40.Rf5 (Nf2) 1.94/14 1:25 40...Qe6 >(g4) 0.37/16 1:00 41.Qe2 (Nc3) 2.56/13 41 41...Kg8 (Qe7) 0.52/15 23 >42.Qd3 (Rxb5) 2.81/13 51 42...Qe8 1.23/15 1:20 43.Ne3 (Nf2) 4.50/13 28 >43...Qc8 2.51/15 1:15 44.Qd5 (Ng4) 4.56/12 27 44...Rh7 3.06/17 1:54 >45.c4 (Qd4) 5.00/12 27 45...bxc4 3.53/15 1:00 46.Ng4 6.41/13 13 Qe6 >4.60/16 51 47.Nf6+ 6.84/13 15 Kg7 #1/18 2:09 48.Nxh7 7.13/13 8 c3 >6.17/17 1:30 49.Kxh3 8.09/13 10 Kxh7 6.22/18 33 1-0 > > >[D]8/5p1k/7r/1p2q1p1/1P2Pn2/5RP1/2P5/3NQ1K1 b - - 0 38 > >W,S - Deep Junior 7 >8/5p1k/7r/1p2q1p1/1P2Pn2/5RP1/2P5/3NQ1K1 b - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Deep Junior 7: > >38...Ne6 39.Rxf7+ Kg8 40.Qc3 Qxe4 > ± (1.32) Depth: 3 00:00:00 >38...Nh3+ 39.Kh2 Kg8 > ³ (-0.57) Depth: 3 00:00:00 >38...Nh3+ 39.Kh2 Kg8 > ³ (-0.57) Depth: 3 00:00:00 >38...Nh3+ 39.Kg2 Kg8 40.Nf2 Qh8 41.Nxh3 Rxh3 > ³ (-0.51) Depth: 6 00:00:00 11kN >38...Nh3+ 39.Kg2 Kg8 40.Nf2 Nxf2 41.Rxf2 Qd4 42.c3 Qa7 > ³ (-0.38) Depth: 9 00:00:00 183kN >38...Nh3+ 39.Kg2 Qe6 40.Nc3 Qc4 41.Qf1 Kg7 42.Qxc4 bxc4 43.b5 g4 > = (-0.13) Depth: 12 00:00:01 2869kN >38...Nh3+ 39.Kg2 Qe6 40.Nc3 g4 41.Rf5 Qc4 42.Qd2 Kg7 43.Rxb5 Qc7 > = (0.09) Depth: 15 00:00:16 45254kN >38...Nh3+ 39.Kg2 > ² (0.39) Depth: 18 00:05:45 1040616kN, tb=668 > >(W, 18.04.2002) > >All that time, and it still doesn't see it! After J7 moved Nh3+, Fritz 7 says: > > >Fritz 7 - W,S >8/5p1k/7r/1p2q1p1/1P2P3/5RPn/2P5/3NQ1K1 w - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Fritz 7: > >2.Kg2 Qe6 3.Rf5 Kg7 4.Qc3+ Kg8 5.Qd3 Qc6 6.Rxb5 g4 7.Rb8+ Kg7 > +- (1.63) Depth: 9/26 00:00:00 452kN >2.Kg2 Qe7 3.Rf5 g4 4.Qe2 Qxb4 5.Rxf7+ Kg6 6.Rf5 Ng5 7.Qxg4 Qxe4+ 8.Qxe4 > ± (1.38) Depth: 10/26 00:00:01 1096kN >2.Kg2 Qe6 3.Rf5 Qc4 4.Rc5 Qe6 5.Qe2 Qd7 6.Rd5 Qa7 7.Ne3 > +- (1.59) Depth: 11/30 00:00:03 2875kN >2.Kg2 Qe6 3.Rf5 Qc4 4.Rc5 Qe6 5.Qe2 Qd7 6.Rxb5 Qd4 7.Qe1 > +- (1.56) Depth: 12/33 00:00:07 6518kN >2.Kg2 Qe6 3.Rf5 Qc4 4.Rc5 Qe6 5.Qe2 Qd7 6.Rxb5 Qd4 7.Qe1 > +- (1.56) Depth: 13/38 00:00:15 14661kN >2.Kg2 Qe6 3.Rf5 Qc4 4.Rc5 Qe6 5.Qe2 Nf4+ 6.gxf4 Qh3+ 7.Kf2 Qh1 8.Ke3 Rh2 9.Nf2 > +- (1.66) Depth: 14/38 00:00:43 40941kN >2.Kg2 Qe6 3.Rf5 Qc4 4.Rc5 Qe6 5.Qe2 Nf4+ 6.gxf4 Qh3+ 7.Kf2 Qh1 8.Ke3 > +- (1.66) Depth: 15/36 00:01:53 107252kN > >(W, 18.04.2002) I have a theory about Junior 7 -- in some positions involving material loss for what it believes is adequate compensation, something prevents it from ever changing its mind further in the search. This may either be intentional, to get it to sacrifice without "wimping" out because the other side can resist for a while, or it may be a bug of some sort. Otherwise, how to explain its behavior (in analysis mode, otherwise the book would intervene) after 1.b3 d5 2.Bb2, when it insists, up to 21 deep (when I gave up), that 2...e5? is the best move, giving up a pawn for nothing. There's another position like this that I could dig up for you, if you're interested, where Uri Blass had Junior 7 analyze a position from a game I played against the Winboard engine Ufim, where Junior will not admit it has no compensation for a lost pawn no matter how deeply it searches. Regards, Vine
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.