Author: Alessio Iacovoni
Date: 22:44:14 10/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 1998 at 19:22:33, Steven Schwartz wrote:
>Just in from Thorsten...
>- Steve
>
>[Event "tournament of the top"]
>[Site "450Mhz machines, 40/120"]
>[Date "1998.10.18"]
>[Round "2"]
>[White "Junior 5.0 PII 450"]
>[Black "CSTal Black V289 K6 450"]
>[Result "1-0"]
>[ECO "D68"]
>[Annotator "Junior 5.0"]
>
>1. c4 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bg5 0-0 6. e3 Nbd7 7. Rc1
>c6
>8. Bd3 dxc4 9. Bxc4 Nd5 10. Bxe7 Qxe7 11. 0-0 Nxc3 12. Rxc3 e5 13. h3
>e4 14. Nd2 Kh8 15. Bb3 Nf6 16. Rc5 Nd7 17. Rc2 Nf6 18. a4 Be6 19. Rc5
>Bxb3 20. Qxb3 Nd5 21. Nb1 f5 22. Nc3 Nb6 23. Rd1 Qf7 24. Qxf7 Rxf7 25.
>d5
>Nd7 26. Rc4 Ne5 27. Rcd4 c5 28. R4d2 Rd8 29. Rf1 Rf6 30. f3 exf3 31.
>gxf3
>Rg6+ 32. Kh2 Rb6 33. Rc2 Rh6 34. Rg2 Nc4 35. Re2 Rb6 36. Rff2 Ne5 37.
>Rc2
>Nd3 38. Rf1 c4 39. Rb1 Ne5 40. Rf2 Nd3 41. Rg2 Ne5 42. Kg3 Rdd6 43.
>Rc2
>Rh6 44. Kf4 Nd3+ 45. Kxf5 Rxh3 46. Ke4 Rd6 47. Nb5 Rd8 48. Rxc4 Nf2+
>49. Kd4
>Rxf3 50. Rf1 h5 51. Rc2 Rdf8 52. d6 R3f7 53. Nc7 Ng4 54. Rxf7 Rxf7 55.
>Ne6
>Rf1 56. Rc8+ Kh7 57. d7 Rd1+ 58. Kc5 Rxd7 59. Nf8+ Kh6 60. Nxd7
>1-0
>
>
>[Event "tournament of the top"]
>[Site "450 Mhz machines, 40/120"]
>[Date "1998.10.18"]
>[Round "2"]
>[White "Junior 5.0 PII 450"]
>[Black "CSTal Black V289 K6 450"]
>[Result "1-0"]
>[ECO "D68"]
>[Annotator "Junior 5.0"]
>[PlyCount "119"]
>
>{135168kB, Jun-book.ctg=351287 pos
>} 1. c4 {0} 1... Nf6 {13} 2. d4 {0} 2... e6
>{8} 3. Nf3 {0} 3... d5 {8} 4. Nc3 {0} 4... Be7 {7} 5. Bg5 {0} 5... O-O
>{9} 6.
>e3 {0} 6... Nbd7 {7} 7. Rc1 {0} 7... c6 {7} 8. Bd3 {0} 8... dxc4 {13}
>9. Bxc4 {
>0} 9... Nd5 {11} 10. Bxe7 {0} 10... Qxe7 {8} 11. O-O {0} 11... Nxc3
>{10} 12.
>Rxc3 {0} 12... e5 {9} 13. h3 {0} 13... e4 {7} 14. Nd2 {0.10/17 207}
>14... Kh8 {
>9} 15. Bb3 {0.23/17 269} 15... Nf6 {394} 16. Rc5 {0.12/17 191} 16...
>Nd7 {191}
>17. Rc2 {0.23/18 0} 17... Nf6 {150} 18. a4 {0.05/18 107} 18... Be6
>{184} 19.
>Rc5 {0.00/18 112} 19... Bxb3 {187} 20. Qxb3 {0.04/17 223} 20... Nd5
>{55} 21.
>Nb1 {0.12/18 289} 21... f5 {213} 22. Nc3 {0.14/18 434} 22... Nb6 {66}
>23. Rd1 {
>0.18/16 204} 23... Qf7 {274} 24. Qxf7 {0.10/18 375} 24... Rxf7 {128}
>25. d5 {
>0.12/18 176} 25... Nd7 {309} 26. Rc4 {0.16/19 0} 26... Ne5 {144} 27.
>Rcd4 {
>0.09/19 612} 27... c5 {7} 28. R4d2 {0.20/17 64} 28... Rd8 {368} 29.
>Rf1 {
>0.07/18 0} 29... Rf6 {294} 30. f3 {0.29/17 244} 30... exf3 {240} 31.
>gxf3 {
>0.18/16 0} 31... Rg6+ {176} 32. Kh2 {0.32/17 285} 32... Rb6 {176} 33.
>Rc2 {
>0.06/17 502} 33... Rh6 {8} 34. Rg2 {0.33/17 328} 34... Nc4 {224} 35.
>Re2 {
>0.22/17 325} 35... Rb6 {197} 36. Rff2 {0.22/17 236} 36... Ne5 {280}
>37. Rc2 {
>0.16/18 198} 37... Nd3 {261} 38. Rf1 {0.15/17 27} 38... c4 {380} 39.
>Rb1 {
>0.02/17 417} 39... Ne5 {15} 40. Rf2 {-0.08/17 446} 40... Nd3 {8} 41.
>Rg2 {
>0.17/16 181} 41... Ne5 {184} 42. Kg3 {0.17/16 0} 42... Rdd6 {229} 43.
>Rc2 {
>0.26/15 139} 43... Rh6 {497} 44. Kf4 {0.32/14 92} 44... Nd3+ {166} 45.
>Kxf5 {
>0.41/16 0} 45... Rxh3 {207} 46. Ke4 {0.25/15 0} 46... Rd6 {200} 47.
>Nb5 {
>1.03/14 72} 47... Rd8 {184} 48. Rxc4 {1.39/16 0} 48... Nf2+ {205} 49.
>Kd4 {
>1.34/17 0} 49... Rxf3 {366} 50. Rf1 {1.37/17 0} 50... h5 {171} 51. Rc2
>{
>1.42/17 0} 51... Rdf8 {169} 52. d6 {1.52/16 0} 52... R3f7 {167} 53.
>Nc7 {
>2.19/17 158} 53... Ng4 {224} 54. Rxf7 {2.82/16 35} 54... Rxf7 {557}
>55. Ne6 {
>3.48/19 0} 55... Rf1 {582} 56. Rc8+ {3.63/19 0} 56... Kh7 {187} 57. d7
>{
>3.60/17 0} 57... Rd1+ {209} 58. Kc5 {3.49/18 0} 58... Rxd7 {170} 59.
>Nf8+ {
>3.70/19 0} 59... Kh6 {425} 60. Nxd7 {3.91/20 0} 1-0
>
>I have heard that the games posted in ccc cause some discussions about
>the strength of cstal dos v289. this amuses me.
>Since some testers have willingly tried to test a broken version (284)
>before, i can only laugh about them doing now "tests" with the version
>289.
>CSTal dos v289 was always able to get at least 50% against fritz or
>nimzo on my machines.
>
>Please - if you test cstal dos, do it on a fast amd machine, not on
>your rusty and old-fashioned and for cstal non optimal shit intel
>machines, at least 450 Mhz is needed, and at least 384 MB for
>Hash-tables (this is the minimum requirement, cstal will not run on
>machines with less ram).
WHAT! ARE YOU KIDDING!!!
>For the next windows98 version of cstal, you need at least 10.1 or
>16.8 Gigabyte harddrive-space, and a DVD-ROM (to get the
>5stone-tablebases installed and the giant-opening-book).
SURE... and a portable lunar landing module too...
>
>Because of chessBase cstal win95 will not have any autoplayer-support.
>The ssdf-guys will not be allowed to test it, they will not get any
>version for free.
>Of course the license-agreement of cstal-win95 will not allow the user
>to publish test-results without the ok of the author. And anybody will
>be law-suited by chris, if they do so. The program will not run on a
>harddisk where any chessBase product is installed.
>
>Life can be so interesting and enjoyable :-))))))))))))))
>
?!?!?
>Have fun !
>best wishes
>
>mclane
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.