Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 16:08:42 12/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 01, 2002 at 17:48:21, andrew tanner wrote:
>On December 01, 2002 at 08:12:25, Hardi Baur wrote:
>
>>I was enlightened when I played this and I want to share it. I began with some
>>opening moves by myself and invite the Ruffian engine as a analysing spectator.
>>Ruffian played several times for a draw, but Shredder rejected and pays the
>>price. Enjoy!
>>
>>
>>[Round "?"]
>>[White "Shredder Paderborn"]
>>[Black "Ruffian"]
>>[Result "0-1"]
>>[ECO "B51"]
>>[Annotator "Shredder Paderborn (30s)"]
>>[PlyCount "178"]
>>
>>{B51: Sizilianisch (Rossolimo-Variante)
>>} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 d6 4. d3
>>Bd7 5. O-O Nf6 6. Nc3 g6 7. Bxc6 bxc6 8. e5 dxe5 9. Nxe5 Bg7 10. Qf3 Rc8 11.
>>Re1 O-O 12. Bf4 Nh5 13. Nxd7 Qxd7 14. Be5 f6 15. Bf4 Nxf4 16. Qxf4 Rf7 17. Qc4
>>Qd4 (17... Qd4) 18. Qa6 Rc7 19. Re6 Qb4 20. Rb1 f5 21. a3 Qb6 22. Qc4 Qa5 23.
>>Rbe1 Bf6 24. Qa2 Rb7 25. R1e2 Kg7 26. Nd1 Qa6 27. Re1 Qb5 28. a4 Qa6 29. b3 Rd7
>>30. Qa3 Qa5 31. Qc1 Rd6 32. Nb2 Qd8 33. Nc4 Rxe6 34. Rxe6 Qd5 35. Qe1 Kg8 36.
>>f3 Bh4 37. Qe3 Bf6 38. Qe1 Bh4 39. Qe3 Bf6 40. Kh1 Rf8 41. Qe1 Bh4 42. Qe2 Kh8
>>43. a5 Bf6 44. Kg1 Ra8 45. Qe1 Rd8 46. Ne5 Rc8 47. Kh1 Kg8 48. Nc4 Bc3 49. Qe2
>>Bf6 50. Qe1 Bc3 51. Qe2 Bf6 52. a6 Rd8 53. f4 Qd7 54. Na5 Rc8 55. Nb7 Qd4 56.
>>Qf1 Rc7 57. Re1 Kh8 58. Re6 Kg8 59. Re1 Kh8 60. Qf3 Qc3 61. Qd1 Qb4 62. Qc1 Rd7
>>63. Re6 Rc7 64. Nd8 Qd4 65. Nf7+ Kg8 66. Ng5 Bxg5 67. fxg5 Qf2 68. Qd1 Qf4 69.
>>Qe1 Qxg5 70. Kg1 Qf4 71. c3 Kf7 72. Re5 Rd7 73. Kh1 Kf8 74. Re3 Qb8 75. Rh3 e5
>>76. Kg1 e4 77. Qb1 c4 78. d4 c5 79. d5 cxb3 80. c4 Qb4 81. Rxb3 Qxc4 82. Rb7
>>Qd4+ 83. Kf1 Rxd5 84. Rxh7 Qe5 85. Qc1 e3 86. Ke1 Rd2 87. Rxa7 Rxg2 88. Kf1
>>Rxh2 89. Ra8+ Ke7 0-1
>
>
> I does seem that playing for a draw is THE way to beat many a chessprogram
>especially at long time controls. It's as if the program spends so much time
>searching that it just must find a winning move! I have wins against many top
>winboard engines at long time controls after using this strategy. Of course
>playing this way against humans leads to draws and even losses sinse "passive
>play" against suspecting players puts you at a major psychological disadvantage.
>(I have tried passive defense against FICS players and have been punished
>several times!)
That is David Levy's suggested strategy against computers: "Do nothing, but do
it well".
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.