Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 11:40:07 07/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 27, 2002 at 21:54:29, Terry McCracken wrote: Which program did you make which solves this trick 'like all programs' within a few seconds here? >On July 27, 2002 at 20:40:30, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On July 27, 2002 at 17:08:48, John Merlino wrote: >> >>>On July 27, 2002 at 03:48:46, Andreas St. wrote: >>> >>>>On July 27, 2002 at 03:37:42, John Merlino wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 27, 2002 at 03:24:26, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>http://www.chessbase.com/events/games/2002_dortmund/dort10b.htm >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>(2) Topalov,V (2745) - Bareev,E (2726) [C11] >>>>>>Sparkassen sf Playoff Dortmund GER (2), 17.07.2002 >>>>>> >>>>>>.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Nbd7 6.Nf3 Be7 7.Nxf6+ Bxf6 8.h4 c5 >>>>>>9.Qd2 cxd4 10.Nxd4 h6 11.Bxf6 Nxf6 12.Qb4 Nd5 13.Qa3 Qe7 14.Bb5+ Bd7 15.Bxd7+ >>>>>>Kxd7 16.Qa4+ Kc7 17.Rh3 a6 18.Rb3 Qc5 19.0-0-0 b5 20.Qa5+ Qb6 21.Qe1 Kb7 22.Qe2 >>>>>>Ka7 23.Nxb5+ axb5 24.Rxb5 Qc6 25.Rdxd5 exd5 26.Qe7+ Ka6 27.Rb3 1-0 >>>>>> >>>>>>After 22...Ka7 >>>>>> >>>>>>[D]r6r/k4pp1/pq2p2p/1p1n4/3N3P/1R6/PPP1QPP1/2KR4 w >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>How quickly does fast hardware and top software, find this combination? >>>>>> >>>>>>Terry >>>>> >>>>>Chessmaster 9000 (top software) on a PIII-600 (not fast hardware) finds the move >>>>>in 40 seconds: >>>>> >>>>>Time Depth Score Positions Moves >>>>>0:00 1/3 0.74 3488 1.Qe5 Rhg8 2.Rg3 >>>>>0:00 1/4 0.94 9422 1.Qe5 Rhg8 2.Rf3 Raf8 3.Kb1 >>>>>0:00 1/5 0.82 27322 1.Qe5 Rhg8 2.Rf3 Raf8 3.Rg3 >>>>>0:02 1/6 1.04 106142 1.Qe5 g6 2.a4 Kb7 3.Kb1 b4 4.Rf3 >>>>>0:05 1/7 0.91 319292 1.Qe5 g6 2.a4 b4 3.a5 Qb7 4.Qd6 >>>>> Rac8 >>>>>0:15 1/8 1.13 1095592 1.Qe5 Rhg8 2.a4 b4 3.a5 Qb7 4.Rg3 >>>>> Rad8 5.Rxg7 Rxg7 6.Qxg7 >>>>>0:34 1/9 0.99 2547618 1.Qe5 Rhg8 2.Rf3 Qb7 3.Qd6 Rac8 >>>>> 4.Nxb5+ Qxb5 5.Rxf7+ Ka8 6.Qxe6 >>>>>0:40 1/9 1.71 3109576 1.Nxb5+ axb5 2.Rxb5 Qc6 3.Rdxd5 >>>>> exd5 4.Qd3 Rhb8 5.Qa3+ Qa6 6.Ra5 >>>>> Rb6 7.Qe7+ Rb7 8.Rxa6+ Kxa6 >>>>>0:59 1/10 3.10 4767354 1.Nxb5+ axb5 2.Rxb5 Qc6 3.Rdxd5 >>>>> exd5 4.Qe7+ Ka6 5.Rb3 Qb6 6.Rxb6+ >>>>> Kxb6 7.Qd6+ Ka7 8.Qc5+ Kb8 9.Qxd5 >>>>>2:00 2/11 3.67 10630854 1.Nxb5+ axb5 2.Rxb5 Qc6 3.Rdxd5 >>>>> exd5 4.Qe7+ Ka6 5.Rb3 Qb6 6.Rxb6+ >>>>> Kxb6 7.Qd6+ Ka7 8.Qxd5 Rhb8 9.Qxf7+ >>>>> Rb7 >>>>> >>>>>jm >>>> >>>> >>>>Hi, >>>> >>>>my actual CM 8000 "Bleifuss" setting (32mb hash) needs 55 sec. on Athlon XP >>>>2000+ >>>> >>>>Analysis by CM Bleifuss: >>>> >>>>1.De5 Thg8 2.Kb1 Tad8 >>>> ² (0.57) Tiefe: 3 00:00:00 >>>>1.De5 Thg8 2.Tf3 Db7 3.Dd6 >>>> ± (0.83) Tiefe: 4 00:00:00 >>>>1.De5 Thg8 2.Tf3 Db7 3.Sf5 Tad8 >>>> ² (0.66) Tiefe: 5 00:00:00 >>>>1.De5 g6 2.a4 b4 3.a5 Db7 4.Dd6 >>>> ± (1.05) Tiefe: 6 00:00:00 109kN >>>>1.De5 g6 2.a4 b4 3.a5 Db7 4.Dd6 Thc8 >>>> ± (0.82) Tiefe: 7 00:00:01 248kN >>>>1.De5 Thg8 2.a4 b4 3.a5 Db7 4.Tg3 Tad8 5.Txg7 Txg7 6.Dxg7 >>>> ± (1.10) Tiefe: 8 00:00:07 1659kN >>>>1.De5 g6 2.a4 b4 3.a5 Dc5 4.Txb4 Tac8 5.Ta4 Thd8 >>>> ± (1.08) Tiefe: 9 00:00:15 3569kN >>>>1.De5 Thg8 2.Tf3 Db7 3.Sf5 exf5 4.Txd5 Tae8 5.Dxf5 Te1+ 6.Td1 Txd1+ 7.Kxd1 >>>> ± (1.08) Tiefe: 10 00:00:42 10189kN >>>>1.Sxb5+ axb5 2.Txb5 Dc6 3.Tdxd5 exd5 4.De7+ Ka6 5.Tb3 Db6 6.Txb6+ Kxb6 7.Dd6+ >>>>Ka7 8.Dc5+ Kb8 9.Dxd5 >>>> +- (3.42) Tiefe: 10 00:00:55 13612kN >>>> >>>>(Fritz 7, 27.07.2002) >>>> >>>>Greetings >>>> >>>>AS >>> >>>I don't like to stick my neck (and Johan's neck) out too far, but results like >>>this make it look like the CM9000 engine is going to be noticeably superior to >>>the CM8000 engine. >>> >>>jm >> >>Not really, it's simply extending less. So the things it used to >>be better in than some other engines, it no longer can do. the things >>it is better in now, the other engines are even better in. >> >>I won't mention the word 'losing by natural induction', but that's >>what it is. No other words for it. Johan been too lazy last years. >> >>Best regards, >>Vincent > >Vincent, all I hear out of your mouth, is Hyatt's Crafty is _weak_ and Johan is >_lazy_ while adding nothing constructive to this thread. > >You didn't even use Diep on the position, albeit it's a piece of garbage! > >In the future, if you've nothing constructive to contribute, STFU for a change! > >Best Regards, > Terry > >P.S. Shall I post what you said about Century 4 at ICC, how it was weak in the > endgame? This was last Feb. when it was Century 4 vs Loek van Wely. > > You're right, you should watch what you say when kibitzing, you never know > when a reporter might be watching!
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.