Author: Albert Silver
Date: 05:28:14 11/09/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 1998 at 20:08:48, Jimbo Green wrote:
>On November 08, 1998 at 17:02:24, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On November 08, 1998 at 11:27:11, Jimbo Green wrote:
>>
>>>Greetings...
>>>
>>>1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7
>>>8.Qe2 a6 9.Rd1 Bd7 10.Bf4 e5 11.Be3 Nf6 12.Rac1 0-0 13.Nd5 Nxd5
>>>14.Bxd5 Rac8 15.Rc3 Kh8 ( I am now out of my book. Based on how long the
>>>computer was thinking, he went out of book after my ninth move)
>>>16.Rdc1 f5 17.exf5 Rxf5 18.Qd2 Rf8 19.Rb3 Na5 20.Rc8 Bc8 21.Rb6 Nc6
>>>22.Qc3 Qd7 23.Bxc6 bxc6 24.Rxc6 Qd8 25.Nd2 h6 26.f3 Bg5? 27.Bxg5 hxg5
>>>(Stupid me. I didn't even realize until now that my queen couldn't
>>>recapture. Can you tell I am intimidated?)
>>>28.Nc4 g4 29.Nxd6 Bd7 30.Rxa6 Qf6 31.Qc7 e4 32. Qc3 (Damn! My one
>>>prayer was that the computer would chomp material and allow me the perpetual
>>>checks with Qd4+)
>>>32...Qxc3 33.bxc3 e3 34.Kf1 gxf3 35.gxf3 Rxf3+ (Gee, now it seems like
>>>I am in the game, fighting for that draw rather than getting crushed as I
>>>thought earlier in the game).
>>
>>Fighting for the draw? Why? Seems quite drawn to me.
>>
>
>That's why YOU are the expert, not me.
>
>>>36.Ke1 Rf2 37.Ra8+ Kh7 38.Ra7 Bg4 39.Ne4 Re2+ 40.Kf1 Kh6 41.Ra6+ g6
>>>42.h3 Bf3 43.Rf6 Bh5 44.Ng3 Rxa2 45.Nxh5 e2+ 46.Ke1 Kxh5 47.Rf4 Rc2
>>>48.c4 Kg5 49.Re4 Kf5 50.Rxe2 Rxc4 51.Kf2 Rc3 52.Re3 Rxe3 (I somehow
>>>doubt a human master would trade off rooks vs Class B player)
>>
>>What would you have it do?
>>
>
>My fault. Forgot to mention I had maybe 10 seconds left on my clock.
>
>
>>>53.Kxe3 Kg5 54.Kf3 Kh4 55.Kg2 g5 56.Kh2 g4 57.hxg4 Kxg4 1/2-1/2
>>>
>>>So, while I know my effort was good Class B - a few good moves, a few
>>>boners - what about the computer? Maybe the rating was obtained by beating
>>>experts at bullet and blitz play.
>>
>>ICC doesn't mix bullet, blitz, and standard ratings. As for your effort, it was
>>quite a bit better than good class B, but nor did the computer commit any
>>obvious blunders. You fail to say though what computer it was: pseudo, software,
>>hardware. Kind of strange seeing a computer play the Smith-Morra, as computers
>>don't usually gambits that well. I was also surprised to see you claim that you
>>were well into theory until the 15th move, not exactly usual at that rating.
>>
>> Albert Silver
>>
>>>
>>>JG
>
>Thanks for the kind words. Actually I am probably slightly underrated as
>my 1650 USCF reflects my last officially-rated game 3 years ago. As far as the
>Smith-Morra is concerned, I am quite booked up on it for the simple reason
>that my best friend and playing partner, a USCF expert, plays it during all
>our games. I fully expected 15.a3 Kh8 where I could then follow up on some
>home analysis.
>
>As far as what type of computer, all I know is my opponent was:
>Absurd(C) 2440 I assume this means computer (I'm extremely new to ICC).
>The choice of opening surprised me too. I didn't catch on to the (C) in
>name until around move 20, after which all tries at tactical shots went
>out the window.
>
>JG
Well, first of all remember that ICC ratings aren't USCF ratings. They represent
relative ratings of players in the various time control options with a margin: a
blitz can be anything from a 3 minute to a 14 minute game (with 0 increment).
Very hard to claim they are the same.
3 years? That's a lot. The only time I had a 3 year hiatus from competetive
play, I came back and found I had added on about 350 points, so anything goes.
Albert Silver
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.