Author: John Merlino
Date: 21:10:56 01/31/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 31, 2003 at 22:12:32, Dana Turnmire wrote: >Ten years ago I would have never even questioned the analysis of a strong master >concerning a positional move. However, with grandmasters now being regularly >defeated by PC programs we all now have to take the edicts of even strong >masters with a grain of salt. In the following position at move 23 IM Graeme >Buckley gives the following possible moves: 23.f5 23.fxe5 23.d6 23.Nxc5. He >says this: > >"These are complicated moves that all allow at least one of black's bishops to >strike across the board. 23.d6, which opens up the diagonal for the bishop on >b7, 23.fxe5 and 23.Nxc5 all score one point." > >"Five points for the thematic 23.f5! with a bonus of one if you planned to meet >23...g5 with 24.Ne4. The threats of f5-f6, Nxc5 and d5-d6 ensure that White >will have an advantage after getting the pawn back." > >Chessmaster 9000 recommends 23.Ne4 with a score of 1.02. IM Buckley doesn't >even give that move as an option. Genius 7 gives the "thematic" move 23.f5 with >an evaluation of .72 but now the time has come as to whether we can any longer >trust our chess manuals or if we go with computer analysis. >The thematic move 23.f5 may very well be correct but how could anyone other than >a grandmaster be for sure? > > >[Event "Valle d'Aosta Open, 8th"] >[Site "Saint Vincent ITA"] >[Date "2000.02.18"] >[Round "7"] >[White "Franco Ocampos, Zenon"] >[Black "Colovic, Aleksandar"] >[TimeControl "-"] >[Result "1-0"] >[ECO "A24"] >[WhiteELO "2511"] >[BlackELO "2414"] > >1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 d6 4.g3 Bg7 5.Bg2 O-O 6.Nge2 c6 7.O-O e5 8.d3 a6 >9.h3 b5 10.f4 Bb7 11.Be3 Nbd7 12.b3 Re8 13.Qd2 exf4 14.gxf4 b4 15.Na4 c5 >16.Rae1 Qc7 17.Rf2 h6 18.Ng3 Nh7 19.Ref1 Rf8 20.d4 Rad8 21.d5 Rde8 22.e5 >dxe5 23.f5 e4 24.Nxe4 Ng5 25.Nxg5 Rxe3 26.f6 Rfe8 27.Ne6 Qg3 28.fxg7 >fxe6 29.dxe6 Ne5 30.Rf8+ Kxg7 31.Qd7+ 1-0 > >[d]4rrk1/1bqn1pbn/p5pp/2pPp3/NpP2P2/1P2B1NP/P2Q1RB1/5RK1 w - - 0 23 FYI, CM9000, on a slow P3-733, says these are the top five moves: Time Depth Score Positions Moves 1:57 1/10 1.05 7310227 23.Ne4 f5 24.Nexc5 Nxc5 25.Bxc5 Rf7 26.Qxb4 exf4 27.Bd6 Qd7 28.Nb6 2:14 1/10 0.62 8438825 23.f5 Nhf6 24.d6 Qc8 25.Bxb7 Qxb7 26.Nxc5 Qc6 27.Nxd7 Nxd7 28.fxg6 fxg6 29.Qxb4 2:30 1/10 0.13 9502524 23.Rd1 Nhf6 24.fxe5 Rxe5 25.Bf4 Rfe8 26.d6 Qc8 27.Bxe5 Rxe5 28.Bxb7 Qxb7 2:54 1/10 -0.05 11242043 23.fxe5 Bxe5 24.Ne4 Ng5 25.Nexc5 Bc3 26.Qc1 Nxc5 27.Nxc5 Bc8 2:37 1/10 -0.08 9986220 23.d6 Qc8 24.Bxb7 Qxb7 25.Nxc5 Nxc5 26.Bxc5 exf4 27.d7 fxg3 28.Rxf7 Rd8 29.Bxf8 Nxf8 Note that Rd1 is 3rd, and there is no mention of Nxc5. After forcing Nxc5, we see that this is a very poor move: Time Depth Score Positions Moves 0:00 1/3 -1.99 897 23...Nxc5 24.Qxb4 exf4 25.Bxf4 0:00 1/4 -1.94 2777 23...Nxc5 24.d6 Qc8 25.Bxb7 Nxb7 26.fxe5 Rxe5 0:00 1/5 -1.83 14835 23...Nxc5 24.f5 Nf6 25.fxg6 fxg6 26.Qxb4 0:00 1/6 -1.80 40658 23...Nxc5 24.f5 Nf6 25.fxg6 fxg6 26.Qxb4 Nd3 0:01 1/7 -1.39 104449 23...Nxc5 24.d6 exf4 25.dxc7 fxe3 26.Qxb4 exf2+ 27.Rxf2 Bxg2 28.Kxg2 0:06 1/8 -1.68 383123 23...Nxc5 24.f5 e4 25.f6 Bh8 26.Bxc5 Qxc5 27.Nxe4 Rxe4 28.Bxe4 Nxf6 0:09 1/8 -1.81 592113 23...exf4 24.Nxa6 Qxc4 25.bxc4 fxe3 26.Qxb4 exf2+ 27.Rxf2 Bxa6 28.Ne4 Ng5 0:18 1/9 -1.75 1229451 23...exf4 24.Nxa6 Qxc4 25.Rxf4 Qxa6 26.Rxb4 f5 27.Rc1 Rc8 28.Rbc4 Rxc4 29.bxc4 0:41 1/10 -1.74 2936052 23...exf4 24.Bxf4 Qxc5 25.Ne4 Qd4 26.Nd6 Rb8 27.Bxh6 Qxd2 28.Bxd2 Nhf6 29.Nxb7 Rxb7 1:37 2/11 -1.45 7102797 23...exf4 24.Bxf4 Qxc5 25.Ne4 Qd4 26.Nd6 Rb8 27.Qe2 Ng5 28.h4 Nh7 29.Re1 However, I wouldn't be quick to dismiss all human commentary -- that would be very silly, IMO.... Humans and computers will both make mistakes. jm
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.