Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 14:55:36 07/31/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 31, 2002 at 17:13:07, Sune Larsson wrote: >On July 31, 2002 at 16:43:36, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On July 31, 2002 at 16:19:27, Sune Larsson wrote: >> >>>I won't dive into the discussion whether top programs have >>>GM strange or not. We all know that GM:s make tactical mistakes, >>>suffer heavily from severe time pressure, sometimes lose concentration, >>>are influenced by their feelings/moods etc. Almost unexplainable mistakes >>>also happen. Like in the game below. >> >>This is not unexplainable. >> >>> >>> >>> [D]r2r4/pp3pk1/4bp2/7R/8/5B2/PP3PPP/5RK1 b - - 0 26 >>> >>> >>> This is from the game IM Berg - GM Timman, Malmö 2002. >>> Move 26 and no time pressure. Here Timman played 26.-Rab8?? >>> His chess knowledge is far beyond playing such a move in this >>> position. With the natural 26.-Rd2 black would have saved the draw. >>> Activity is vital - activity in rook endings is super vital. Black is >>> under pressure and must create counter chances. Of course Timman knows >>> this and more - so why really did 26.-Rab8?? happen? Not so much tactics >>> here either. >> >>As we know human chess is _more_ than just playing the results of optimal >>calculations. Often chess is based with priority on psychological factors. This >>might here be the case. Timman could try to reveil the reasons. How about this. >>Just speculating. Timman was bluffing. He's a much more experienced player. But >>Berg just played on undisturbed. We should have many more informations to come >>nearer to the truth. > > > > No, I cannot see any trace of a bluff from Timman's side. I see only > a gross mistake, easily refuted by 27.Ra5. 26.-Rab8?? is a very passive > move and doesn't set any traps for white. It just gives away the initiative. > Only Timman knows why he played Rab8. After the game he didn't want to > analyse, but left the board quickly with the remark: "This should have > been a draw." To me it feels like Timman somehow lost his concentration > and was out of chess. Mixed up his possible coming moves or whatever. > > > > > >> >>But the point is for computerchess. Do you think that human players - if they >>had begun to research machine chess - would play the optimal moves from the view >>of human chess or moves that would cause confusion for the machine? Know what I >>mean? That would be real anti computerchess. > > > > I think it's a question of motivation from the human point of view. > If programs would participate in normal tournaments, playing for price > money, human players would naturally prepare accordingly. Which means > playing against known computer weaknesses. Exactly. If, only if, computerchess is forced by the rules to create identities of at least a minimum time period. But I agree, even then, human players would succeed, if [again] the recompensation is high enough. That was surely not the case individually in Argentina actually. There the community got the recompensation just by allowing machine participation. Rolf Tueschen > > > Sune > > > > > >> >>Rolf Tueschen >> >> >>>Fritz7 immediately chooses 26.-Rd2 with +0.47 for white. >>> After 26.-Rab8 Fritz shows +1.34. The whole game below. >>> >>> >>>[Event "Sigeman & Co Malmo SWE"] >>>[Site "Malmo SWE"] >>>[Date "2002.06.07"] >>>[Round "2"] >>>[White "Berg, E."] >>>[Black "Timman, J."] >>>[Result "1-0"] >>>[ECO "B03"] >>>[WhiteElo "2514"] >>>[BlackElo "2616"] >>>[PlyCount "79"] >>>[EventDate "2002.06.09"] >>>[Source "Mark Crowther"] >>>[SourceDate "2002.06.10"] >>> >>>1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. d4 d6 4. c4 Nb6 5. exd6 exd6 6. Nc3 Be7 7. Qf3 c5 8. >>>dxc5 dxc5 9. Be3 Nc6 10. Rd1 Nd4 11. Bxd4 cxd4 12. Nge2 O-O 13. Nxd4 Bf6 14. >>>Ndb5 Qe7+ 15. Be2 Nxc4 16. Nd5 Qe5 17. Nxf6+ gxf6 18. O-O Qxb5 19. Rd4 Qe5 20. >>>Rxc4 Be6 21. Rh4 Rfd8 22. Bd3 Qg5 23. Bxh7+ Kg7 24. Rh5 Qg4 25. Be4 Qxf3 26. >>>Bxf3 Rab8 27. Ra5 a6 28. b3 Rd2 29. h3 Bc8 30. Rd5 Rxa2 31. Rd8 Rc2 32. Re1 a5 >>>33. Ree8 f5 34. Bd5 Be6 35. Rxb8 Bxd5 36. Re5 Rc5 37. Kh2 Kf6 38. f4 Rb5 39. >>>Rd8 Bc6 40. Rd6+ 1-0 >>> >>>Sune
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.