Author: Fernando Alonso
Date: 00:07:38 06/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 2003 at 18:52:29, Uri Blass wrote: >On June 16, 2003 at 17:56:34, Fernando Alonso wrote: > >>On June 16, 2003 at 09:22:19, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On June 16, 2003 at 08:57:45, Wayne Lowrance wrote: >>> >>>>On June 16, 2003 at 08:08:14, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 16, 2003 at 08:04:29, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 16, 2003 at 07:21:41, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>RK 2003 tournament 120'/60 >>>>>>>The games ara available for download >>>>>>>under section "RK 2003" at >>>>>>>Homepage "Kurt & Rolf Chess": http://www.beepworld.de/members39/utzinger >>>>>>>Kurt >>>>>> >>>>>>Just like I always stated Shredder7 or 7.04 engine is not stronger than Fritz >>>>>>8.0.0.8 or ChessMaster. If Chessmaster had a better Opening book, it would >>>>>>become an unbeatable monster. >>>>>> >>>>>>Pichard >>>>> >>>>> Time will tell ... in my opinion Shredder704 is the strongest >>>>> program at the moment. But there are still 66 rounds to go. >>>>> Kurt >>>> >>>>Kurt I find it interesting that running time control in analysis fritz gives >>>>best performance over all of the engines, including Shredder 7.04. To me that is >>>>the qualification for the program with the best chess knowledge. Other programs >>>>might be better than Fritz8 at discrete time controls but for long time thinking >>>>Fritz8 has no equal. >>>>Crafty is also good and once in a while suggests a better move than Fritz, but >>>>when I play Crafty against Fritz in long time control where I force the move at >>>>level 18-20 depending on engine output Fritz8 wins. >>>> >>>>Thanks >>>>Wayne >>> >>>I think that it depends on the position. >>> >>>Here is an example when Fritz8 played poorly in analysis of one of my >>>correspondence games. >>> >>>Fritz8 suggested 9...Ne4 10.d5 f5 in the pv after some hours and I decided to >>>check this line. >>>This line may be not the best(I do not know) but it does not change the fact >>>that Fritz played weak in the game that I give(time control is practically more >>>slower than 240/40 because I gave both sides the right to use more time by +200% >>>so the sides had 12 hours/40 moves on A1000) >>> >>> >>>The game is today at move 31 (I did not choose Ne4) so I am sure that the game >>>that I give cannot help the opponent >>> >>>(234) Shredder 7 - Fritz 8 [E15] >>>URI-PC, 240'/40+240'/40+240' URI-PC (1), 06.02.2003 >>> >>> >>>W=16.0 ply; 141kN/s B=15.0 ply; 417kN/s 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Ba6 5.b3 >>>Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Be7 7.Bg2 Bb7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Nc3 Ne4 10.d5 f5 Both last book move 11.Qc2 >>>0.47/16 36:38 Nxd2 0.19/15 1:04:36 12.Qxd2 0.48/16 12:54 a6 (Na6) 0.00/14 17:29 >>>13.Rad1 0.79/15 22:55 Qe8 (Bd6) 0.22/15 40:00 14.Ne1 (Nd4) 0.84/15 23:45 >>>14...Ra7 0.34/15 1:04:25 15.Nd3 0.84/15 26:41 Qh5 (Kh8) 0.34/13 17:49 16.Rfe1 >>>0.88/15 20:45 Bg5 0.44/15 48:44 17.e3 0.99/16 33:40 Qh6 0.44/14 20:14 18.c5 >>>1.04/15 28:09 Be7 0.50/15 34:11 19.b4 1.14/14 13:31 Bf6 (Rc8) 0.53/14 26:56 >>>20.Qc2 (Ne2) 1.20/15 24:01 20...Kh8 0.56/14 32:53 21.Na4 1.19/15 21:32 Bd8 >>>0.66/15 26:42 22.c6 (Qb3) 1.21/15 18:16 22...dxc6 (Bc8) 0.69/16 25:13 23.dxc6 >>>1.19/13 27 Bc8 0.62/15 13:37 24.Nab2 1.69/17 20:47 Bf6 (Be7) 0.94/16 22:17 >>>25.Nc4 1.80/16 8:11 g6 (Qh5) 1.03/15 15:41 26.a4 1.89/18 43:21 Qg7 1.28/15 18:29 >>>27.f4 1.89/17 45:32 g5 (a5) 1.37/15 28:54 28.a5 2.19/16 24:13 Bd8 (b5) 1.44/14 >>>16:07 29.axb6 2.29/15 22:07 cxb6 1.47/15 17:41 30.Nde5 2.26/16 24:01 b5 (Qc7) >>>1.41/14 13:57 31.Nd6 2.58/16 23:39 Bb6 1.53/14 11:08 32.Kh1 2.56/15 21:02 Re7 >>>1.47/13 11:06 33.Qb3 2.63/15 18:32 Qf6 (Bc7) 1.47/15 52:37 34.Qc3 2.62/16 29:45 >>>Kg8 1.41/14 10:39 35.e4 (Rd3) 2.57/14 23:40 35...h6 (gxf4) 1.41/13 26:33 36.Qf3 >>>2.87/13 22:35 gxf4 1.56/12 9:27 37.gxf4 3.24/14 21:35 Bc7 (Kh7) adjud. 1.81/12 >>>11:40 1-0 >>> >>>Uri >>Hi, >>As I have seen you play correspondence chess, you may be able to answer my >>question. >>I am quite a bad chess player, and I really haven´t improved for a time. I know >>the way for improving is studing but most times I am too lazy. I am thinking of >>trying correspondence chess in order to improve and force myself if not to >>study, to play long time controls and think more what I am doing during the >>game, at least more than in a 5min blitz online game. I would like to ask you or >>whoever wants to post a reply if there is any free place to play correspondece >>chess and being allowed to get help from a chess engine, I would like to use it >>to analyse my moves. I have seen some sites but program aid was forbiden and I >>wouldn´t like to cheat. >>Thanks in advance, >>Fernando. > >If the target is to improve your game then I doubt if >using a computer is a good idea > >For a site you can see the following site: > >http://www.iccf.com/ > >I am surprised that you had problems to find a site that allow chess engines >because I believe that in most of the correspondence games computers are >allowed. > >Uri Hi Uri, Thanks for your advice, I will probably start thinking not using engines to check my analysis, I thought it was a good idea to prevent mayor tactical blunders, which I am very fond of :), but it might not be a so good after all. I checked several places to play correspondence chess. Some of them fobid the use of software or that was what I understood in their "terms&conditions". Others simply did not say anything about it, but I searched their forums and found posts regarding the use of computers, most of the players said it was like cheating so I just wanted to know if there was some place where the use was commonly accepted. I found one, but the free membership lasts only for 90 days. That was why I asked this question. Regards, Fernando.
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.