Author: Tony Werten
Date: 00:36:54 01/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2003 at 01:14:27, Charles Roberson wrote: > > The tournament was great fun. Tiring, but fun. I prefer the format at > WCCC 2002, but it would be too much for all tournaments to be like that. > > The competition was great. I have lots of analysis data. The talk on ch 64 > "compfortably numb" (pun intended). I enjoyed the IM commentary and Volker > performed excellently as TD. I hope to see more like these several times a > year. You can't get better competition without an expensive trip to Europe. > > Version 3.4 was used. It is 2x faster than 3.3 and more knowledgable: > better king safety, mobility, ... > It averaged a ply deeper than the Maastricht version even at half the time > control. > > I'll comment on some of the games as the theme seems repeatable. > > Game 1: Searcher - NoonianChess 1-0 > I tried our a virtually untested new book. Ran into a bug on move 6. > This caused the drop of a bishop for 2 pawns. Amazingly, Noonian played > quite well after this -- it used its center pawn advantage to control > the center and the game. Then a mistake on move 34; KxB should have been > the move (a free bishop and now Noonian would be up a full two pawns). > But seems there is a bug that caused the mistake. Analysis from CM8000 > revealed that after 34 ... KxB, Noonian can force the win of the other > bishop but alas Searcher could for a draw by perpetual check or 3frp. > > So, I was happy with the game and use my old tournament book for the > rest of the tournament. > > Game 3: NoonianChess - PostModernist 0 - 1 > Noonian gained a draw from PM in WCCC 2002. It was a great experience > competing against Andrew so, I was quite happy to do it again. Noonian > stayed in book for 10 or so moves. Noonian makes questionable bishop > moves on moves 17 and 18. (remember game 1 -- mistake in not taking a > free bishop). Noonian does not make the same mistakes when given the > positions but it does if the game is played to that point (a bug a bug > -- or is it something to dig into). After this, PostModernist performs > excellently in controlling the game. > > Game 4: Matacz - NoonianChess 0 -1 > Noonian won a pawn and created a passer on the A file by move 21. The > rest of the game centered on this one pawn. Noonian pushed the pawn and > Matacz spent most of the rest of the game keeping the a pawn from > promoting. There were times when I thought Noonian had stronger moves but > I'm not sure (I haven't analyzed it deeply but the stronger moves > involved a bishop -- hmm bishop problem sounds like a theme to me). > Finally, Matacz is able to capture the pawn on a2. However, Noonian has > too many threats on the king which causes the win of material and the > eventual mate of Matacz. A long game. After the first two, I kept > wondering when is the bug going to happen again and lose this one. > The great part of live games!!!! > > Game 5: NoonianChess - Aristarch 1 - 0 > The opening had me on the edge of my seat. Noonian was agressive from the > start with an attack on Aristarch's king side. I had some of > that "Australian speed skater luck": Aristarch lost its connection > for more than 15 minutes and forfeited the game. > > Game 6: Pepito - NoonianChess 1 - 0 > I was happy that Noonian held its own to move 35. Pepito sacs a rook for > the bishop and things go down hill from there. A rook for a bishop -- > hmm is there an issue with bishops? > > Game 7: NoonianChess - Amyan 0 - 1 > NoonianChess plays well from opening to midgame. I was happy to move > 25. Noonian has a nice position. I need to analyze this deeply to see > what really happened. At move 35, Noonian has a passer and seems there is > a lot of potential for a win. However, at move 41 Noonian gives up a rook > for a pawn and knight. I suspect it liked 3pawns and a knight vs a rook > and a pawn -- especially considering 2 of Noonians pawns are passers. > Amyan forces the trade of all this and the ending is a forced draw. > However, I didn't have egtb's and move 65 is a mistake. I loaded this > position into Noonian latter and it doesn't make the mistake. Another > bug to fix. Also, this the second game in live tournament competition > lost due to lack of egtb's -- the first is Goliath Lite - NoonianChess > Maastrict WCCC 2002. > > Game 8: Czolgista - NoonianChess 0 - 1 > I expected to win this one as the programs met in competition on ics this > week. However, Czolgista froze up on move two and lost on time having > made only one move. Wow, that Austrailian speed skater luck was with me. > > Game 9: NoonianChess - XiniX 1 - 0 > This is my favorite game. I have not analyzed it yet but I can't wait. > This game had classic horizon effect issues. Both sides had chances in > the middle game. So, it was quite exciting. Forget the edge of my seat -- > I was pacing during this one. At move 30, Noonian considers itself up > 2.8 pawns. The kibitzing made this far more interesting than without it. > For a series of moves Noonian and Xinix agree with the scores that > Noonian is up 3 pawns. Then Xinix searchers a little deeper and claims > the score is even. A move later (move 45), Noonian thinks it is down > 4/10 of a pawn. After several moves of 3 pawns up, now both programs > call it even. (so where is this bug?). Oh no -- on move 46 both programs This game showed a new bug in XiniX :( At move 45 XiniX thinks it's winning (it was) but then somehow at 46 got a different position on the board. At move 49 where I (manually) resigned, XiniX is actually trying to give a checkmate move, but winboard keeps saying "illegal move" :( IIRC XiniX did get Ra1 through, but interpreted it as a different move (ie ponderhit on a different move) Tony > claim XiniX is up 3 pawns. At move 47, both programs claim the game is > even again. Are these programs fickle or what? At move 48, Noonian is > up 2 pawns. (Yes, both programs are searching 10+ ply deep per move or > so claims the kibitzing). Noonian makes move 49 and kibitzes that it is > up a queen!!! XiniX agrees and resigns. > > Again the tournament was great!!! Thanks to IM Schroer and Volker. > Thanks to all the participants for the games and the entertainment > on ch 64. > Also, big thanks to my wife for giving me a weekend in front of a PC. > Hmm -- did I just define nerd or geek?
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.