Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 07:24:26 09/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 15, 2002 at 08:55:57, Chessfun wrote: >On September 15, 2002 at 07:59:42, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>From the Macheide XP tuning games of Thorsten I found the following game. NB >>that I did _not_ select the game. It was the first I played. Now I will take a >>closer look. >> >>The game [read the article in Computerschachwelt]: >> >>Shredder 6 - XP Machëide x2cou_51 >>40 Moves in 120 min; 20 Moves in 60 min auto232 match, 400mhz (3), 13.09.2002 >> >>1.d4 book 0s 1...Nf6 1:27m 2.c4 book 0s 2...e6 5s 3.Nc3 book 0s 3...Bb4 2s 4.e3 >>book 0s 4...0-0 3s 5.Bd3 book 0s 5...d5 3s 6.cxd5 book 0s 6...exd5 2s 7.Nge2 >>book 0s 7...Re8 2s 8.0-0 book 0s 8...Bd6 3s 9.f3 book 0s 9...c5 2s 10.Qe1 book >>0s 10...Nc6 3s 11.Qh4 book 0s 11...Be7 4s 12.dxc5 -0.15/13 10:06m 12...Bxc5 >>5:30m 13.Nd4 -0.15/13 0s 13...Bd7 3:37m (Ne5) 14.Nxd5 -0.03/13 9:32m 14...Nxd5 >>43s 15.Qxh7+ -0.01/13 3:47m 15...Kf8 6s 16.Qh8+ -0.37/13 7:09m 16...Ke7 4s >>17.Qxg7 -1.08/12 5:04m 17...Rg8 8:11m 18.Qh7 -1.64/12 0s 18...Nxd4 15:04m >>19.exd4 -1.73/13 0s 19...Bxd4+ 2:25m 20.Kh1 -1.73/13 0s 20...Be6 5:47m 21.Re1 >>-1.88/11 5:58m 21...Kd6 5s (Qb6) 22.Qe4 -1.70/11 6:51m 22...Qf6 4s 23.Rf1 >>-3.51/9 12:55m 23...Rxg2 4:02m 24.Kxg2 -9.03/11 7:48m 24...Rg8+ 4s 0-1 >> >>Now my questions: >> >>1. Could someone tell me where exactly the books end? > >11...Be7 is the last book move. > > >>2. Also could someone explain why Rebel played his book moves with different >>times? > >Autoplayer lag, in DOS it happens. > > >>3. As a general question, does someone know if besides book cooking there can be >>operator or tester tuning and if yes please with an example? > > >Naturally it's possible in theory to play through a few lines and see how any >program would proceed. Note; I am not saying in this case that happened. > > >>4. In my eyes we have a book cooking in the example above. Shredder ends with >>Qh4, is that right? > >Yes Qh4 is last book move. > > >>5. The cook is Be7, right? > > >Be7 is the last Rebel book move. It's also a book move for many other programs. >Simply look at Fritz 7.ctg and look at blacks score with this move. > > >>6. Look at the position after 13...Bd7. Could I give you this position to be >>examined with your favorite progs? Who plays Nxd5? I already checked that FRITZ > >How long did you check with Fritz for? and what version? Takes Fritz 7 a fair >time to get off Nxd5 on my PC AMD @1400 mhz. > >r2qr1k1/pp1b1ppp/2n2n2/2bp4/3N3Q/2NBPP2/PP4PP/R1B2RK1 w - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Fritz 7: > >14.Nxd5 > = (0.19) Depth: 8/26 00:00:00 299kN >14.Nxd5-- > = (-0.09) Depth: 9/29 00:00:00 548kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Nxc6+ Bxc6 19.Qh6 > = (-0.19) Depth: 9/29 00:00:01 791kN >14.Rd1! > = (0.00) Depth: 9/33 00:00:06 4138kN >14.Rd1 h6 15.Kh1 Nxd4 16.exd4 Bd6 17.Nb5 Bb8 > = (-0.12) Depth: 9/33 00:00:07 5039kN >14.Rd1 h6 15.Na4 Be7 16.Nf5 Ne5 17.Nxe7+ Qxe7 18.Nc3 Nxd3 19.Rxd3 Qe5 > = (-0.19) Depth: 10/28 00:00:15 10129kN >14.Rd1 h6 15.Kh1 Rc8 16.Nf5 Ne5 17.Bc2 Nc4 18.Nxd5 Nxd5 > = (-0.22) Depth: 11/30 00:00:36 24384kN >14.Nxd5! > = (-0.19) Depth: 11/30 00:00:38 25868kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Qh7 Kf8 19.Qh6+ Ke8 20.Nxc6 >Bxc6 > = (-0.06) Depth: 11/32 00:00:39 27029kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Qh7 Qb6 19.Bc4 Bxd4 20.Bxd5 > = (-0.09) Depth: 12/34 00:00:55 37871kN >14.Nxd5-- > ³ (-0.37) Depth: 13/40 00:01:42 69562kN >14.Nxd5 > ³ (-0.37) Depth: 13/40 00:01:54 78003kN >14.a3! > ³ (-0.34) Depth: 13/40 00:02:19 95976kN > >(, MyTown 15.09.2002) Yes, you are right, here is what I get so far, analysis still running: Shredder 6 - XP Machëide x2cou_51 [D] r2qr1k1/pp1b1ppp/2n2n2/2bp4/3N3Q/2NBPP2/PP4PP/R1B2RK1 w - - 0 1 Analysis by Fritz 7: 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 ² (0.47) Depth: 7/21 00:00:00 82kN 14.Nxd5-- = (0.19) Depth: 8/24 00:00:00 145kN 14.Nxd5 = (0.19) Depth: 8/24 00:00:01 252kN 14.Nxd5-- = (-0.09) Depth: 9/29 00:00:04 509kN 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Nxc6+ Bxc6 19.Qh6 = (-0.19) Depth: 9/29 00:00:04 750kN 14.Rd1 = (0.00) Depth: 9/33 00:00:26 5473kN 14.Rd1 h6 15.Na4 Be7 16.Nf5 Ne5 17.Nxe7+ Qxe7 18.Nc3 Nxd3 = (-0.19) Depth: 10/29 00:00:43 9578kN 14.Rd1 h6 15.Nce2 Ne5 16.Bc2 Qb6 17.b3 Rac8 = (-0.19) Depth: 11/31 00:02:09 29771kN 14.Rd1 h6 15.Nce2 Ne5 16.b3 Nxd3 17.Rxd3 Qb6 18.Nf4 Rac8 19.Bb2 = (-0.22) Depth: 12/33 00:04:00 56324kN 14.Nxd5 = (-0.19) Depth: 12/35 00:04:20 60874kN 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 = (-0.09) Depth: 12/36 00:04:42 66542kN 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Qh7 Qb6 19.Qe4+ = (-0.22) Depth: 13/37 00:07:20 106087kN 14.Nxd5-- ³ (-0.50) Depth: 14/40 00:18:34 274357kN 14.Nxd5 ³ (-0.50) Depth: 14/40 00:22:55 342102kN 14.Rf2 ³ (-0.47) Depth: 14/40 00:40:14 601615kN 14.Rd1 ³ (-0.44) Depth: 14/40 00:51:18 766626kN (P 500, 16 MB hash only, engine in CB8, MyTown 15.09.2002) It's interesting that a different Hash and a different update (?) brings such differences. Also some changes for R etc. could be important. > > >Shredder 6 also plays Nxd5 as it did in the game. > >r2qr1k1/pp1b1ppp/2n2n2/2bp4/3N3Q/2NBPP2/PP4PP/R1B2RK1 w - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Shredder 6: >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Qb6 18.Qg5+ Nf6 19.Nf5+ Bxf5 >20.Qxf5 > ± (1.22) Depth: 7/14 00:00:00 202kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Qb6 18.Qg5+ Nf6 19.Nf5+ Bxf5 >20.Qxf5 Bxe3+ 21.Bxe3 Qxe3+ 22.Kh1 > ± (0.97) Depth: 8/16 00:00:01 279kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Qb6 18.Re1 Ncb4 19.Be4 Qf6 >20.Qxf6+ Kxf6 > ± (0.77) Depth: 8/16 00:00:01 381kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Qb6 18.Qg5+ Nf6 19.Nxc6+ bxc6 >20.Rd1 > ± (1.02) Depth: 9/18 00:00:02 604kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Qb6 18.Qg5+ Nf6 19.Nxc6+ Qxc6 >20.Be4 Qc7 21.Bxb7 > ± (1.38) Depth: 9/18 00:00:03 869kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Nf6 18.Bc4 Nxd4 19.Qxf7+ Kd6 >20.Kh1 Rf8 21.exd4 Rxf7 22.Bxf7 > ± (1.13) Depth: 10/20 00:00:04 1136kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Nf6 18.Nb3 Bd6 19.Bd2 > ± (1.05) Depth: 10/20 00:00:06 1525kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Nxc6+ Bxc6 19.Qe5+ Kf8 >20.Bd2 Qb6 21.Kh1 Nxe3 22.Bxe3 Bxe3 > ± (0.80) Depth: 11/22 00:00:09 2421kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Nxc6+ Bxc6 19.Qe5+ Kf8 >20.Bd2 Qb6 21.Be4 Nxe3 > ² (0.30) Depth: 11/22 00:00:11 3026kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Qh6 Nxd4 19.exd4 Bxd4+ >20.Kh1 Qb6 21.Re1+ Kd8 22.Qh5 Be6 > ² (0.28) Depth: 11/22 00:00:16 4178kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Qh6 Nxd4 19.exd4 Bxd4+ >20.Kh1 Qb6 21.Re1+ Be6 22.Bg5+ Nf6 23.Rab1 Rae8 > = (0.18) Depth: 12/24 00:00:36 9454kN >14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxh7+ Kf8 16.Qh8+ Ke7 17.Qxg7 Rg8 18.Qh6 Nxd4 19.exd4 Bxd4+ >20.Kh1 Qb6 21.Re1+ Be6 22.Bf5 Rae8 23.Bg5+ Bf6 > = (-0.03) Depth: 13/26 00:01:27 22419kN > >Note in the game Shredder went to depth 13 in 9:32 but the PC used was much >slower. Yes, ok. But please note that I did not assume that the moves of Shredder were a fake. I have a totally different hypothesis. Among others. Here comes. I. My question is what someone could do by tuning the engine. How he could find the idea. What I assume for this single game is that the tuning here either was unimportant because the game is lost after Nxd5 or the tuning was perfected to 'win' the won game for sure. Could you or someone explain how the usual tuning happened? II. My opinion is that such a game where Shredder plays into a lost game out of the opening does not prove anything about a successful tuning of Rebel. III. Why there is no comparison in the presentation? Say Rebel (normal) plays suchand Macheide 51 plays such? THen it would be much easier to follow the process. IV. My hypothesis therefore: You can't prove the successful tuning with a deadly lost game by the opposing prog(here Shredder). V. Interesting note: therefore I conclude from IV. that a sort of statistics is unnecessary here. Here we must analyse the single games. Simply adding the results and making conclusions is wrong. It's interesting that Thorsten, who is always talking about his ability to make conclusions from a single game does not talk about his reflections of such a game here but he is presenting a series of games to let the numbers of performance speak. BTW Ed does it with his control games in the same wrong manner. VI. Hypothesis: You should not add up game results of "apples" games and "beans" games. Therefore it is important to examine the games prior any counting processes. > > >>7 does not play Nxd5. It's clear that Black gets a tempo with Rg8 and then can >>take on d4. > > >Ok agreed but Shredder plays Nxd5 so what would you have him do? You give a good question, but here it wasn't Shredder under the microscope but the process of tuning for Rebel... > > >>7. Could someone explain how K-safety could be involved in this special game? >>Black takes he risk of a wandering K to d6 and White is "safe" behind his pawns. >>Why Shredder, the multi-time Wch cannot see that the open g-file brings storm >>for his K? > > >Shredder plays the moves shown, it's a book line in which it ends playing a poor >move on a slow PC. All ok. I asked because I wanted to know if such a play is a well known (insider!) weakness. Conclusion then: such a game has no meaning at all in the presentation of the results of a tuning process. Thanks for the many data. For the first time I understood how to save the complete analysis simply by pushing it into the clipboard. Could you comment on the specific details of my data? Rolf Tueschen > > >Sarah.
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.