Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 17:23:29 06/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 2003 at 19:12:05, Uri Blass wrote: >On June 16, 2003 at 18:49:56, Marc van Hal wrote: > >>On June 16, 2003 at 17:42:04, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On June 16, 2003 at 17:10:44, Marc van Hal wrote: >>> >>>>r4rk1/p5pp/1p1ppn2/3b4/1P1Pnq2/P4N2/1BQ1BPPP/2R2RK1 b - - 1 1 >>>> >>>>Find a clear win for Black. >>>>This is pointed at the diference in tactics between nulmove and normal search >>>>So sory John this time you are not invited. >>>>Or you might provide them the answer. >>>> >>>>Marc >>> >>>I do not understand what has John to do with null move pruning. >>> >>>shredder7.04(p85) can only see a clear advantage for black but not a clear win >>>in 15 minutes >>> >>>New game >>>[D]r4rk1/p5pp/1p1ppn2/3b4/1P1Pnq2/P4N2/1BQ1BPPP/2R2RK1 b - - 0 1 >>> >>>Analysis by Shredder 7.04: >>> >>>1...Rac8 2.Qxc8 Rxc8 3.Rxc8+ Ne8 >>> ± (0.91) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>>1...Rac8 2.Qxc8 Rxc8 3.Rxc8+ Kf7 >>> ± (1.01) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 >>> ² (0.28) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 >>> ³ (-0.56) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 >>> ³ (-0.56) Depth: 1/7 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 2.Rce1 >>> µ (-0.76) Depth: 2/10 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 2.Bd3 Rad8 >>> µ (-0.72) Depth: 3/11 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 2.Bc4 Ng5 3.g3 >>> µ (-0.97) Depth: 4/16 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 >>> µ (-1.04) Depth: 4/16 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 >>> µ (-1.04) Depth: 5/18 00:00:00 >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 >>> µ (-1.04) Depth: 6/18 00:00:00 26kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Be4 >>> µ (-1.11) Depth: 7/19 00:00:00 58kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qg4 5.hxg4 >>> µ (-0.86) Depth: 8/20 00:00:00 114kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qg5 >>> µ (-0.86) Depth: 8/20 00:00:01 158kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Be4 5.Qc7 Qd2 >>> µ (-0.72) Depth: 9/22 00:00:02 328kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qg5 5.Qc7 Qd2 >>> ³ (-0.62) Depth: 10/24 00:00:05 748kN >>>1...Rad8 2.Ba6 Ng4 3.h3 Ng5 4.Kh1 Bxf3 5.Qxh7+ Kxh7 >>> ³ (-0.63) Depth: 10/27 00:00:15 2227kN >>>1...Rad8 2.h3 Ng5 3.Nxg5 Qxg5 4.f3 Qg3 5.Bd3 Rf7 6.Qf2 g6 7.Qxg3 >>> ³ (-0.64) Depth: 10/27 00:00:16 2469kN >>>1...Kh8 2.Ba6 Ng4 3.h3 Ng5 4.Nxg5 Qh2# >>> ³ (-0.65) Depth: 10/27 00:00:28 4231kN >>>1...Kh8 2.h3 Ng5 3.Nxg5 Qxg5 4.f3 a5 5.bxa5 Rxa5 6.Bd3 Qe3+ 7.Kh2 Ng4+ 8.hxg4 >>>Qg1+ >>> ³ (-0.65) Depth: 10/27 00:00:30 4530kN >>>1...Kh8 2.Bd1 Rf7 3.Rb1 Bb7 4.Qc1 Qf5 5.Be2 Raf8 6.Nh4 >>> ³ (-0.63) Depth: 11/30 00:00:51 7659kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qg5 5.Kg1 Rxf3 6.Qc8+ Rxc8 >>> ³ (-0.64) Depth: 11/30 00:01:00 8704kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qh2 5.Bd3 Bxf3 6.Qc8 Raxc8 7.Bxh7+ Kxh7 >>> µ (-0.99) Depth: 11/30 00:01:03 9009kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qh2 5.Kf1 Rf6 6.Qc7 Bxf3 7.gxf3 Rf7 >>> µ (-1.07) Depth: 11/30 00:01:17 11035kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qh2 5.Kf1 Rf6 6.Qc7 Bxf3 7.Ke1 Qxg2 >>> µ (-1.32) Depth: 12/30 00:01:31 13103kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qh2 5.Qd2 Rf5 6.Qe3 Raf8 7.Kf1 R5f6 8.Rc7 >>>Rxf3+ 9.gxf3 Rxf3+ 10.Bxf3 >>> µ (-1.32) Depth: 12/34 00:01:54 16335kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qh2 5.Qd2 Rf6 6.Qe1 Bxf3 7.Bxf3 Raf8 >>> -+ (-1.50) Depth: 13/38 00:03:07 26366kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qh2 5.Kf1 Rf6 6.Qd3 Raf8 7.Qe3 Bxf3 8.gxf3 >>>Qh1+ 9.Qg1 Rxf3+ 10.Bxf3 >>> -+ (-1.43) Depth: 14/38 00:05:27 48195kN >>>1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qh2 5.Kf1 Rf6 6.Qd3 Raf8 7.Qe3 Qg3 8.Qf2 >>>Qg6 >>> µ (-1.19) Depth: 15/41 00:11:21 97158kN >>> >>>(, eim 17.06.2003) >> >>Fritz8 and Junior8 do NOT play Ng4 >> >>Infact after Ng4 h3 they only candidate Nf6 or Nh6 >>And evaluate the postion as equal after 3 Nxf2 >>And that is why I call it a nullmove problem >> >> Chessmaster does play Ng4 >>There for I said Jhon didn't have to join >>Have you actualy looked at the postion After 5 Rf6 or better 7. Qe3? >>If you would contineu to play this against a GM he might feel offended. >>Like a full piece up in a totaly save postion is not enough to win these days. >>But the postion is won in all postions which can arise after the knight capture >>on f2 and that is why I call it tactical game play not epd test postions. >> >> >>Marc > >Shredder considers Ng4 as a positional decision >The score is even less than +1 for black when I search one ply deeper and I do >not like 5...a5 in the pv. > >New game >r4rk1/p5pp/1p1ppn2/3b4/1P1Pnq2/P4N2/1BQ1BPPP/2R2RK1 b - - 0 1 > >1...Ng4 2.h3 Ngxf2 3.Rxf2 Nxf2 4.Kxf2 Qh2 5.Kf1 a5 6.Qc3 axb4 7.Qxb4 Ra7 8.Qe1 >Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Rxf3+ > µ (-0.95) Depth: 16/44 00:29:38 257181kN > >(, eim 17.06.2003) > >When I give it the position after Kf1 >It likes Rf4 and analysis after 5...Rf6 shows even start by showing smaller >advantage and needs depth 14 to fail low. > >New game >[D]r4rk1/p5pp/1p1pp3/3b4/1P1P4/P4N1P/1BQ1B1Pq/2R2K2 b - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Shredder 7.04: > >5...a5 6.Qc3 Rf5 7.bxa5 bxa5 8.Bc4 > µ (-0.93) Depth: 11/14 00:00:07 1062kN >5...a5 6.Qc3 Rf5 7.bxa5 > µ (-0.93) Depth: 12/18 00:00:18 3056kN >5...a5 6.Qc3 Rae8 7.Qc7 Bxf3 8.gxf3 Qxh3+ 9.Ke1 Qg3+ 10.Kd1 Qg1+ 11.Kd2 Qg5+ >12.Kd1 Qg1+ 13.Kd2 Qg5+ 14.Kd1 Qg1+ 15.Kd2 > µ (-0.84) Depth: 13/36 00:03:23 33254kN >5...Rf4 6.Bc4 Bxf3 7.Bxe6+ Kh8 8.gxf3 Rxf3+ 9.Ke1 Qh1+ 10.Kd2 Rf2+ 11.Kc3 Rxc2+ >12.Kb3 Rxc1 13.d5 > µ (-0.85) Depth: 13/36 00:03:50 37804kN >5...Rf4 6.Qc3 Raf8 7.Qe3 Re4 8.Qd3 Qg3 9.Qd2 Ref4 > µ (-0.88) Depth: 13/36 00:04:14 42008kN >5...Rf4 6.Qc3 Raf8 7.Qe3 Re4 8.Qd3 Qg3 9.Rc3 Kh8 10.Qa6 Rxd4 > µ (-0.95) Depth: 14/36 00:06:12 62151kN > >(, eim 17.06.2003) > >New game >[D]r5k1/p5pp/1p1ppr2/3b4/1P1P4/P4N1P/1BQ1B1Pq/2R2K2 w - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Shredder 7.04: > >6.Qd3 Raf8 7.Qe3 Rg6 8.Ke1 Rxg2 9.Nxh2 Rxe2+ 10.Kxe2 Bc4+ 11.Rxc4 > µ (-1.13) Depth: 9/25 00:00:03 527kN >6.Bd1 Qh1+ 7.Kf2 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Rxf3+ 9.Kxf3 Qxg2+ 10.Qxg2 g6 > µ (-1.12) Depth: 9/25 00:00:03 559kN >6.Bd1 Qh1+ 7.Kf2 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Rxf3+ 9.Kxf3 Qxg2+ 10.Qxg2 g6 11.Qf2 Rf8+ 12.Ke3 > µ (-0.77) Depth: 9/26 00:00:06 1045kN >6.Bd1 Raf8 7.Qf2 a5 8.bxa5 bxa5 9.Be2 Bxf3 10.Qg3 Qxg3 > µ (-0.77) Depth: 9/27 00:00:09 1495kN >6.Bd1 Qh1+ 7.Kf2 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Rxf3+ 9.Kxf3 Qh2 10.Qe4 Rf8+ 11.Ke2 Qg3 12.Rf1 Rxf1 >13.Kxf1 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 > ³ (-0.60) Depth: 10/29 00:00:15 2547kN >6.Bd1 Raf8 7.Qf2 R6f7 8.Ke1 Qf4 > ³ (-0.55) Depth: 11/33 00:00:31 5232kN >6.Bd1 Raf8 7.Qf2 a5 8.bxa5 bxa5 9.Be2 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Rf4 11.Ke1 d5 12.a4 R8f7 >13.Kd2 > ³ (-0.44) Depth: 12/33 00:01:07 11556kN >6.Bd1 Raf8 7.Qf2 R6f7 8.Be2 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qf4 10.Kg1 a5 > ³ (-0.41) Depth: 13/34 00:02:22 24572kN >6.Bd1 Qh1+ 7.Kf2 Raf8 8.Qxh7+ Kxh7 9.Bc2+ g6 10.Rxh1 Bxf3 11.a4 Rc8 12.a5 > ³ (-0.66) Depth: 14/39 00:03:52 39263kN >6.Bd1 Qh1+ 7.Kf2 Raf8 8.Qxh7+ Kxh7 9.Bc2+ g6 10.Rxh1 Bxf3 11.gxf3 Rxf3+ > µ (-1.16) Depth: 14/39 00:04:01 40712kN >6.Bd1 Qh1+ 7.Kf2 Raf8 8.Qd3 Qh2 9.Rc2 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Rxf3+ 11.Qxf3 Rxf3+ 12.Kxf3 >h5 13.Rc8+ Kh7 14.Bc3 Qg1 15.Rc7 Qf1+ > -+ (-2.86) Depth: 14/43 00:05:59 60824kN > >(, eim 17.06.2003) > > >Uri Rebel10 Anti Gm on a 200mhz computer already found these moves ! Schredder 3 also played Ng4 But the nullmove personaleties of Rebel don't. Junior also played a5 but then the postion is unclear. So I think it has to do with Nullmove I can't come up with an other reason. Maybe you do? Marc
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.