Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 06:50:00 01/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 19, 2003 at 13:37:18, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On January 19, 2003 at 11:23:06, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>
>>On January 19, 2003 at 11:07:27, mike schoonover wrote:
>>
>>>crafty holds a very tuff position.good work prof. hyatt.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>[Event "ICS Unrated Standard match"]
>>>[Site "chessclub.com"]
>>>[Date "2003.01.19"]
>>>[Round "-"]
>>>[White "crafty"]
>>>[Black "SearcherX"]
>>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>>[WhiteElo "2554"]
>>>[BlackElo "2528"]
>>>[TimeControl "2700+10"]
>>>
>>>1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 O-O 5. Ne2 d5 6. a3 Be7 7. cxd5 exd5 8.
>>>g3 c6 9. Bg2 Na6 10. O-O Nc7 11. h3 Bd7 12. Nf4 Qc8 13. h4 Bd6 14. Re1 Re8
>>>15. Bd2 Bxf4 16. exf4 Bh3 17. Rxe8+ Ncxe8 18. Bf3 Bg4 19. Bxg4 Nxg4 20. Qe2
>>>Nd6 21. Re1 Nf6 22. Nd1 a5 23. f3 c5 24. dxc5 Qxc5+ 25. Qf2 d4 26. Bc3 Nf5
>>>27. Re5 Qc8 28. Bxa5 Qc1 29. Qd2 Qb1 30. Kh2 Rc8 31. Nf2 Rc2 32. Qe1 Qxe1
>>>33. Bxe1 Ne3 34. Kh3 h5 35. g4 Rxb2 36. gxh5 Nfd5 37. Ne4 Nxf4+ 38. Kg3
>>>Ne2+ 39. Kf2 f6 40. Re8+ Kh7 41. Bd2 Nf4 42. a4 Nc4 43. Ke1 Ng2+ 44. Ke2
>>>Ra2 45. Rd8 Nf4+ 46. Ke1 Nxd2 47. Nxd2 Ra1+ 48. Kf2 Rxa4 49. Nb3 Ra2+ 50.
>>>Ke1 d3 51. Rd4 Ng2+ 52. Kd1 Ne3+ 53. Kc1 Rc2+ 54. Kb1 Rc3 55. Nc1 Nf5 56.
>>>Rd7 d2 57. Ne2 Rxf3 58. Kc2 Rf2 59. Kxd2 Ng3 60. Ke3 Rxe2+ 61. Kf3 b5 62.
>>>Kxg3 Re4 63. Rd8 Rc4 64. Rb8 b4 65. Re8 Rc5 66. Rb8 Rc4 67. Rb7 Kh6 68. Rb5
>>>Re4 69. Kh3 Rd4 70. Kg3 Re4 71. Rb7 Rd4 72. Rb5 Rc4 73. Kh3 Re4 74. Kg3 Rd4
>>>75. Kh3 Kh7 76. Rb8 Rc4 77. Kg3 Rc3+ 78. Kg4 Rc4+ 79. Kh3 Re4 80. Kg3 Rd4
>>>81. Kh3 Rd3+ 82. Kg4 b3 83. Kf4 Rc3 84. Kg4 Rd3 85. Kf4 Rc3 86. Kg4 Re3 87.
>>>Kf4 Rh3 88. Kg4 Rc3 89. Kf4 Rd3 90. Kg4 Re3 91. Rb4 Kg8 92. Kf5 Rf3+ 93.
>>>Kg6 Rg3+ 94. Kf5 Kf7 95. Rb7+ Kf8 96. Ke6 Re3+ 97. Kf5 Rg3 98. Ke6 Re3+ 99.
>>>Kf5 Rf3+ 100. Kg6 Rg3+ 101. Kf5 Rf3+ 102. Kg6 Rg3+ 103. Kf5 Re3 104. Kg6 f5
>>>105. Kxf5 Rg3 106. Kf4 Rd3 107. Kg5 Rg3+ 108. Kf4 Rd3 109. Kg5 Rc3 110. Kf5
>>>Re3 111. Kf4 Rc3 112. Kf5 Rf3+ 113. Kg4 Re3 114. Kf4 Rd3
>>>{Game drawn by repetition} 1/2-1/2
>>>
>>>regards
>>>mike
>>
>>Could someone with experience explain this game? I mean when I entered the game
>>it was objectively lost, chess, but Crafty always had a large time advantage.
>>The score often danced around -2.7 etc. What I want to know is this. Is it for
>>the programmers clear that the machines are still way too weak to win such an
>>endgame advantage? Was it therefore clear ong before that this was a typical
>>draw OR was it really a sensational game by Crafty to draw it in such a
>>position? Any comments?
>>
>
>I think you are misunderstanding the game. Just because crafty said "-2.7"
>doesn't mean black was winning.
No, you are right, that wouldn't mean a thing. But as I said, perhaps you
oversaw it, you were lost in fact and what I wanted to know from you or any
expert how you managed to draw.
Unfortunately I was the first time on ICC and was unable to get IM Schroer. :(
Just a short shot on ICC: If you have a good idea what to do you might advise
the staff there that they should change a few things. It is true that the moment
you've understood a few things then it's no prob to simply learn the next
commands and to become familiar with the technique BUT at the beginning and
under time pressure, because Steffen from Hossa had informed me to hurry up
because the games had been started (since 25 minutes it was) THEN you are quite
lost in the first display with the 4 or 5 windows. One single centre box however
could solve that one. Where just three basics of the technique of ICC would be
explained. For example it took me some minutes to understand the question of
distance between "words". E.g. obs 415. And I had obs415. Ok, I'm not a
programmer and for me the two are almost the same because I differ between
language and numbers, so a space is unneccessary. Any ideas forthat FIRST entry?
Rolf Tueschen
>
It just means that Crafty didn't quite
>understand the position itself. IM Schroer had said that this was a draw
>for a good while. It just took crafty a long time to see the eval climb
>back to 0.00, because it didn't understand that the position with the white
>rook behind the black pawn, with the kingside 2 vs 2 was simply a draw.
>
>
>
>>The Ferret game went the other way round. After it survived a terrible King
>>attack it looked to me that Ferret had at least counterchances with his pawn on
>>the queen side. Even when White had opened his King position with f4/g4 Black
>>must sek chances on the first ranks. With N and Q this is possible. How you
>>would judge that game? Was it a typical computer game, just odd, or was it
>>something special and why?
>>
>>You see, I have asked my questions sure on a chess base but I wished to hear how
>>real CC experts saw these two games.
>>
>>Unfortunately I didn't have the time to obs the rest of the games because Wijk
>>was also interesting.
>>
>>A technical aspect: could someone say if ICC uses less PC ressources than
>>playchess.com? I had the impression that the multitasked view on several boards
>>eeded less than in the ChessBase server and that is why there the PC system
>>often breaks down even if you try the second game in parallel. Of course there
>>you can also open an engine for analysis. Last: I couldn't get +ch64 working!
>>What was my fault?
>>
>>Rolf Tueschen
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.