Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 11:59:09 01/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2003 at 00:42:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 21, 2003 at 22:24:43, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > >>On January 21, 2003 at 17:19:53, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>On January 21, 2003 at 16:16:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On January 21, 2003 at 15:25:21, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 21, 2003 at 14:35:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 21, 2003 at 09:17:36, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On January 21, 2003 at 09:09:49, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On January 21, 2003 at 08:52:02, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On January 20, 2003 at 23:00:55, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On January 20, 2003 at 21:57:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>On January 20, 2003 at 21:32:22, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>On January 20, 2003 at 20:44:21, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>[snip] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Round 6 Crafty vs Searcher >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>A near disaster for the first game of the second day. The same d4 opening >>>>>>>>>>>>>led to a similar position, but things did not go very well here. First score >>>>>>>>>>>>>out of book was -.42, which was typical for every 1. d4 game crafty played as >>>>>>>>>>>>>white. But it was able to pull that up quickly normally. 10 moves out of book, >>>>>>>>>>>>>the score hadn't changed, showing that searcher was playing very well and with >>>>>>>>>>>>>a reasonable amount of understanding of the position. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Finally by move 24, Crafty was back to a slightly + score, and this held until >>>>>>>>>>>>>it started dropping as it misjudged the queen/rook attacking in the center. At >>>>>>>>>>>>>move 32, the score was -.68 after 16 plies. at move 35, the score was -1.5, at >>>>>>>>>>>>>move 40 -2.0, -2.5 at move 50, -3 at move 60, and at this point Crafty dug >>>>>>>>>>>>>in its heels and pulled the score back to -2.3 where it stayed for a long >>>>>>>>>>>>>while. But it slowly traded pawns, and the score started swinting back. By >>>>>>>>>>>>>move 80, it was -2.0 again, -1.5 by move 85, -1.0 by move 95, and it finally >>>>>>>>>>>>>reported a draw score at move 102. Of all the games it played, this was a >>>>>>>>>>>>>really nice effort as it showed a lot of understanding about king rook and pawn >>>>>>>>>>>>>endings, something I have worked on a lot over the years. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>I find your last sentence surprising. Crafty was very lucky in this game that >>>>>>>>>>>>Searcherx did not play 62...Re8 62.Kxg3 Rb8 winning easily. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Crafty says if you play Re8 it just plays Rb7 immediately, not Kg3. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Score doesn't change much... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>It may be overlooking something, but it isn't going to let black get >>>>>>>>>>>the rook behind the pawn... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Maybe we are at the wrong move? IE you have two move 62's above. >>>>>>>>>>>Do you mean 61. Re8? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Yes. 61...Re8 62.Kxg3 Rb8 was my intention. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Going back to move 61, and playing Re8 Kg3 Rb8 I get Rd4 and Rb4. White >>>>>>>>>>>loses one of the pawns on the h file, but only one. It isn't clear to me, >>>>>>>>>>>without a lot of study, how black makes progress. The pawn is blockaded, so >>>>>>>>>>>the black rook is stuck on the b file unless it gives check. The black >>>>>>>>>>>king can't abandon the kingside or white will eat the g pawn and the hpawn >>>>>>>>>>>should be enough to force the trade of the rook and a draw... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>[D]8/1p1R2pk/5p2/7P/7P/5Kn1/4r3/8 b - - 0 60 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>61...Re8 62.Kxg3 Rb8 63.Rd4 b5 64.Rb4 Kh6 65.Kg4 Rb7 66.Kh3 Kxh5 67.Kg3 g6 >>>>>>>>>>68.Kh3 f5 69.Kg3 Rb6 70.Kh3 Rc6 71.Rb3 Rc4 is a prosaic and convincing win. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>A comparable position is available with many different continuations. One is >>>>>>>>>your 61-Re8 others I pointed out in >>>>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?278466 >>>>>>>>>The point is that you always winn with the f/g free pawns if they are so good >>>>>>>>>combined. No need to know the rule of the R behind the pawns because you give >>>>>>>>>the b pawn away. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Kind regards, >>>>>>>>>Rolf Tueschen >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Even though it is later given away, it handcuffs the defense giving time to make >>>>>>>>preparations before giving up the b-pawn to win on the K-side, so it is still an >>>>>>>>important tool. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>No doubt about it. But I was looking for the programmers and you said yourself >>>>>>>that this is difficult to program. So I had a look at totally normal chess, >>>>>>>calculable or countable if you like. And this position with the combined pawns >>>>>>>is won and that is the whole thing. I meant the argument of the "difficult" >>>>>>>Re8-b8 is even not necessary. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Rolf Tueschen >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>One of the problems here is that the f and g pawns are _not_ passed. The f pawn >>>>>>is. The >>>>>>g-pawn is not, because white hangs on to the h-pawn. Here are the problems I >>>>>>see that have >>>>>>to be solved: >>>>>> >>>>>>1. black's rook is behind the b-pawn. If black moves the rook without giving >>>>>>check, the >>>>>>pawn goes away as it is attacked by white's rook. >>>>>> >>>>>>2. I will assume the h5 pawn is going to "go". After Re8 Kxg3 Rb8 Rd4 b5 Rb4 >>>>>>the rooks >>>>>>are stuck. Black can move to b8/b7/b6. White can't move the rook or the pawn >>>>>>advances. >>>>>> >>>>>>3. After black takes on h5 and white keeps the king at g3-h3 to hold the >>>>>>h-pawn, black has >>>>>>a couple of plans. But not all work. The king can't go help the rook, because >>>>>>white's king makes >>>>>>that a long path and it is close to the kingside pawns. the king can't win the >>>>>>white h-pawn by >>>>>>itself, and it can't get the rook up to attack it. So either the king goes to >>>>>>the queenside to help >>>>>>the b-pawn advance, or black tries advancing the f-pawn. >>>>>> >>>>>>White definitely has many problems here, but the question is "are they _all_ >>>>>>unsolvable?" >>>>>>It isn't that clear to me. One thing is for sure, it isn't an "easy win". It >>>>>>is going to take a lot >>>>>>of sweat and calculation. >>>>> >>>>>Sorry, Bob, you must have been tricked by your own program because GR is right, >>>>>this is really easy. Just play through his variation. You as White have no >>>>>chance to deviate from that line more or less. The plan of Black is so easy: >>>>>Your R is on b4, then he puts his R on b6 and when it suits him he will go for >>>>>the double attack on your last pawn h4. So the b pawn has no meaning after all. >>>>>It is just to keep you in tension with your R. Then, when the last pawn of White >>>>>has been taken, the rest is known theory. And you can't do anything against it. >>>>>So - what I found very clever during the game, that Crafty played merry-go-round >>>>>in the center with R and N and for all neutralized the dangerous d pawn, that >>>>>does not draw because of the given final. And Black could win earlier, with my >>>>>move Rf2 instead Rc3, and your K is outplaced. So you must search for >>>>>alternatives way earlier. The structure with the double pawn is weak. First the >>>>>d pawn and then Black also had the free b pawn afterwards, so basically it's not >>>>>the good game by Crafty as I had thought at first. But overall you were very >>>>>good with Ferret who normally should draw in the last round and then tie with >>>>>you. Ferret played really sharp chess while you are extremely good in your time >>>>>management, that was very obvious to me. Was one of the best results for you, >>>>>right? >>>>> >>>>>Rolf Tueschen >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>No. The ferret result was _bad_. A loss is bad. :) >>>> >>>>the ruffian and yace games were good. They were wins. :) >>>> >>>>However, until I have time to study the searcher endgame, I can't say much more. >>>>It isn't an "easy" win in my opinion (by black). It might be winnable. But >>>>there >>>>are enough places to go wrong that a human might well have problems. IE it >>>>would be interesting to play this against a human at a minute a move or whatever >>>>to see how "easy" it turns out to be. :) >>>> >>>>I would expect more than one "oh shit!" during the experiment. :) >>>> >>>>Humans might think that they know all about rook endings. But if you go back >>>>prior >>>>to endgame tables, humans thought they knew all about KQ vs KR, until belle >>>>showed >>>>the world that the king and rook to _not_ stay together for best defense. >>>> >>>>So while I don't like white's position, until I study it in detail, I haven't >>>>concluded it >>>>is lost yet, myself... >>> >>> >>>PROPOSAL: >>> >>>As Ricardo said he is now sure how to win against all defense. Bob, couldn't we >>>organize that on ICC on a specific date so that many of us could follow? >>>Ricardo, would that be possibl for you to go on ICC? >>> >>>Rolf Tueschen >> >> >>As long as I get to play Black, I'm game if RH is. >> >>Next Sunday evening works for me. A blitz time control such as 5 mins plus a 5 >>sec increment should be plenty. I'll play a slower time control if RH thinks >>Crafty needs more time to play this well. >> >>BTW, I want to warn you about building this up too much. The position really is >>quite lopsided, so the spectators are liable to find it anticlimactic. >> > >I'm game, since I have not had much time to study the position. The time >control depends on how quickly you think black can win. IE if it is pretty >clear after 10-20 moves, then maybe the original 45 10 time control will be >better, if it will be longer, then something faster... > >Main point will be to pick a time that I can convert to CST where I am, so >that we show up at the same time, and not on different days. :) 6 pm pacific would be 8 pm central for you. Does that sound okay? We can decide the time controls later. I'd like to wrap it all within an hour if possible. > >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>[snip]
This page took 0.01 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.