Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: A New look at Kasparov -Deeper Blue Game1 :After 39...h4 its a Draw

Author: Slater Wold

Date: 09:36:21 06/27/03

Go up one level in this thread


On June 27, 2003 at 11:25:19, Uri Blass wrote:

>I am not sure if Kh6 is better than h4(both moves are probably losing)

I am.  They are both losers, because black is lost.  But Kh6 prolongs it, per
DB's scores/lines & my own analysis last nite.

But when you're talking about 'which losing move is better', it's almost
impossible to argue either side.  Bottom line, they still lose.

>Here is some analysis by Fritz8
>It likes Kh6 but changes it's mind later to h4 and I suspect that the same could
>happen with deeper blue.

DB liked h4 first, and had a pretty even score.  I believe it failed low, and it
changed Kh6, which had a score of -94 when it played it.  I don't know how DBs
scoring worked, I just have other lines to compare with.

>I do not have the logfile of deeper blue near me but even if it's line is
>better(when it considered h4) it does not prove that deeper blue saw the tactics
>because better line can be a result of a slightly different evaluation.

This was never a 'DB IS BETTER THAN FRITZ 8' post.  He said h4 draws.  I said no
it doesn't.  However, DB was seeing things that CM couldn't see in 999s on his
machine, and it saw things in 29s which took CM 7 minutes on a P4 2.4Ghz.

>New game
>[D]3rr3/6k1/2p3P1/1p2nP1p/pP2p1P1/P1B1Nb1B/2P2K2/5R2 b - - 0 1
>
>Analysis by Fritz 8:
>
>1...hxg4--
>  ²  (0.44)   Depth: 7/23   00:00:00  81kN
>1...hxg4 2.Bxg4 Kf6 3.Bxf3 exf3 4.Rg1 c5 5.Ng4+ Kxf5 6.Nxe5 cxb4
>  ±  (1.06)   Depth: 7/27   00:00:00  177kN
>1...Rd6!
>  ±  (1.03)   Depth: 7/27   00:00:00  184kN
>1...Rd6!
>  ±  (0.87)   Depth: 7/27   00:00:00  193kN
>1...Rd6 2.g5 Kf8 3.Bxe5 Rxe5 4.c4 Rd2+ 5.Kg3
>  ±  (0.75)   Depth: 7/27   00:00:00  200kN
>1...Kf6!
>  ±  (0.72)   Depth: 7/27   00:00:00  225kN
>1...Kf6 2.Rg1 hxg4 3.Bxg4 Bxg4 4.Nxg4+ Kxf5 5.Nxe5 Rxe5 6.Bxe5
>  ²  (0.62)   Depth: 7/27   00:00:00  237kN
>1...Kf6--
>  ±  (0.91)   Depth: 8/23   00:00:00  292kN
>1...Kf6 2.Rg1 Kg7
>  ±  (0.91)   Depth: 8/26   00:00:01  396kN
>1...Rd6!
>  ±  (0.87)   Depth: 8/26   00:00:01  422kN
>1...Rd6!
>  ±  (0.72)   Depth: 8/26   00:00:01  440kN
>1...Rd6--
>  ±  (1.00)   Depth: 9/20   00:00:02  633kN
>1...Rd6 2.g5 Kf8
>  ±  (1.00)   Depth: 9/22   00:00:02  707kN
>1...h4!
>  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 9/29   00:00:03  1196kN
>1...h4!
>  ±  (0.81)   Depth: 9/29   00:00:03  1233kN
>1...h4 2.g5 Kg8 3.Bg2 Rd6 4.Bxe5 Rd2+ 5.Kg1 Bxg2 6.Rf2
>  ²  (0.69)   Depth: 9/29   00:00:03  1283kN
>1...h4 2.g5 Kg8 3.Ke1 Rd6 4.Bxe5 Rxe5 5.Bg4 Bxg4 6.Nxg4 Re7 7.Ke2
>  ²  (0.69)   Depth: 10/28   00:00:04  1593kN
>1...h4 2.g5 Kg8 3.Kg1 Kf8 4.Re1 Rd6 5.Kf2 Nxg6
>  ±  (0.72)   Depth: 11/28   00:00:07  2761kN
>1...h4 2.g5 Kg8 3.Bg2 Kf8 4.Bh1 Rd6 5.Bxe5 Rd2+ 6.Kg1 Bxh1 7.Bc3 Re2
>  ²  (0.59)   Depth: 12/32   00:00:15  5828kN
>1...h4 2.g5 Kf8 3.Bg2 Bxg2 4.Kxg2 Nf3 5.Rh1 Re7 6.Kf2
>  ±  (0.75)   Depth: 13/34   00:00:29  11999kN
>1...h4--
>  ±  (1.03)   Depth: 14/35   00:00:57  24151kN
>1...h4 2.g5 Kf8
>  ±  (1.03)   Depth: 14/49   00:01:08  28771kN
>1...h4--
>  ±  (1.31)   Depth: 15/39   00:02:52  74580kN
>1...h4 2.g5 Kf8
>  ±  (1.31)   Depth: 15/52   00:03:11  83028kN
>1...Kh6!
>  ±  (1.28)   Depth: 15/52   00:07:08  189665kN
>1...Kh6--
>  +-  (1.56)   Depth: 16/39   00:09:30  253728kN
>1...Kh6 2.gxh5 Bxh5
>  +-  (1.56)   Depth: 16/63   00:12:44  345407kN
>1...h4!
>  +-  (1.53)   Depth: 16/63   00:13:08  355882kN
>1...h4!
>  ±  (1.37)   Depth: 16/63   00:13:32  365719kN
>
>(, eim 27.06.2003)
>
>Uri


IMO, a 13 minute eval from Fritz 8 is not equal to a 100+ second DB eval.  It
took DB a couple of seconds to hit your node count.  And while I do believe
their eval wasn't as advanced as the Fritz/Shredder/Junior of today, I need a
little more than 1...h4! and a score to really compare the two evals.



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.