Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 12:39:21 11/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 2003 at 04:32:57, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>NBE 2003 Tournament on our Homepage
>http://www.utzingerkurt.com
>
>NBE 2003 Tournament
>Athlon 1.3/256 MB, time control: 120'/60 + 60'/30 + 30',
>ponder=off, no books, no EGTB, no learning at all,
>each game, 64 MB hash for each engine, Fritz8-GUI,
>we use the following pre-set start positions for the games
>1.e4 / 1.d4 / 1.c4 / 1.g3 / 1.f4 , so each engine 10 games
>against all other programs = total 70 games/engine, total 280 games,
>Tester: Kurt Utzinger und Rolf Bühler, Switzerland
>
>In the running tournament we can sometimes see games that
>demonstrate extremely weaknesses in handling the opening
>when engines are forced to play without their books:
>
>[D]r1bqkbnr/pppp1ppp/2n5/8/8/4Q1P1/PPP1PP1P/RNB1KBNR b KQkq - 0 4
>Junior8 played 4.Qe3? and Fritz8 replied 4...Qe7?
Common sense says that Qe3 is weak, but the problem is to demonstrate it against
an otherwise extremely strong opponent.
Can you punish Junior's Qe3, even with the help of another strong chess engine?
Can you demonstrate that this move is the losing one then?
I would never dare to add an interrogation mark behind Qe3. If you do, why not
adding one behind 1.g3 as well?
Christophe
>[Event "NBE 2003 Ath 1.3/64 120'/60"]
>[Site "Zurich"]
>[Date "2003.11.07"]
>[Round "7.5"]
>[White "Junior 8"]
>[Black "Fritz 8"]
>[Result "0-1"]
>[ECO "A00"]
>[Annotator "Utzinger,K"]
>[PlyCount "114"]
>
>1. g3 {Start of game / Partiebeginn} 1... e5 2. d4 exd4 3. Qxd4 Nc6 4. Qe3+ Qe7
>{Hard to believe that a top program like Fritz plays such a useless move
>instead of the normal 4...Be7. In any case in this way it is not possible to
>punish white's bad opening strategy / Kaum zu glauben, dass ein
>Spitzenprogramm wie Fritz einen derart nutzlosen Zug statt des normalen 4...
>Le7 spielt; auf jeden Fall ist es so nicht moeglich, die schlechte
>Eroeffnungsstrategie von Junior8 zu bestrafen} 5. Nc3 Nb4 6. Qd2 Qd6 7. a3
>Qxd2+ 8. Kxd2 Na6 {What we have so far seen in this game is computer chess
>from the year 1986 / Was wir bis hierher in dieser Partie gesehen haben, ist
>Computerschach aus dem Jahre 1986} 9. Bg2 c6 10. e4 f5 11. exf5 d5 12. g4 g6
>13. Nf3 gxf5 14. g5 h6 15. Re1+ Ne7 16. Ke2 hxg5 17. Bxg5 Nc5 18. h4 Bg7 19.
>Rad1 Ng6 20. Rh1 Rh5 21. Nd4 {White's position is difficult but this loses a
>pawn / Die weisse Stellung ist schwierig, aber das verliert einfach einen
>Bauern} 21... Bxd4 22. Rxd4 Ne6 23. Rdd1 Nxg5 24. hxg5 Rxg5 25. Rdg1 Be6 26.
>Kd2 O-O-O 27. Ne2 Ne5 28. b3 Rdg8 29. f4 Nc4+ 30. bxc4 Rxg2 31. Rxg2 Rxg2 32.
>Rh6 Kd7 33. c5 b6 34. Rh7+ Kd8 35. cxb6 axb6 36. Ke3 c5 37. c3 Bd7 38. Kf3 Rg6
>39. Kf2 Rd6 40. Rh5 Kc7 41. a4 Kc6 42. Rg5 d4 {The only way to make further
>progress / Der einzige Weg, um weitere Fortschritte zu machen} 43. cxd4 cxd4
>44. Ke1 d3 45. Nc3 d2+ 46. Kd1 Rd3 47. Nb1 (47. Kc2 {??} 47... Rxc3+) 47... Rd4
>48. Rg6+ Kb7 49. Nc3 Bc6 50. Rg1 Bf3+ 51. Kc2 Ka6 52. Rf1 d1=Q+ {Leads to a
>pawn ending / Fuehrt zu einem Bauernendspiel, das fuer Schwarz einfach
>gewonnen ist} 53. Nxd1 Bxd1+ 54. Rxd1 Rxd1 55. Kxd1 Ka5 56. Kc2 Kxa4 57. Kc3 b5
>0-1
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.