Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:24:51 11/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 2003 at 07:26:12, Albert Silver wrote: >>>>>>I wasn't watching ESPN's coverage. I was online on ICC with Crafty running >>>>>>in channel 211 as usual. The resignation came with crafty at +2, which seems >>>>>>_way_ early, unless there is some sort of agreement that when Fritz goes >>>>>>down -2 it _must_ resign... >>>>> >>>>>you seem to believe that the number the eval spits out has something to do with >>>>>how hard it is to win a position... that isn't true ;-) >>>>> >>>>>cheers >>>>> martin >>>> >>>> >>>>I seem to remember "meat makes mistakes". I might resign at -5 or something, >>>>but not at -2. Remember that Kasparov had good positions in games 1 and 2. >>>>In game two he lost, rather than Fritz "winning". I'd want to have him >>>>demonstrate that he would not do the same thing in game 3. :) >>> >>>meat makes mistakes *much* more frequently when either >>>- meat is in time trouble >>>- the position is complicated >>>both was not the case here. it was the appropriate moment to resign. i guess if >>>you play out a few more moves on your machine, as suggested by the commentators >>>(or basically, exchange a few more pieces by invading on the a-file), crafty >>>will soon say +3 or more for white. >>> >>>cheers >>> martin >> >> >>My problem with resigning so early is that it is not that unlikely that >>white makes a small mistake. Then another. > >Of course, you're correct that they could easily have played out a few more >moves. In fact, I would agree with you. Not because I think GK is bound to make >a mistake and put the result in doubt, I honestly don't for a second, but >because this is a very public display, and as has correctly become fashionable: >even if the result is crystal clear to the GMs playing, they play it until it is >crystal clear to the spectators. It needn't be to the lowest common denominator, >but yes, it should have been played until something concrete was a small step >away. I am reminded of an ACM event I participated in where Cray Blitz was playing Deep Thought 2. We had played a very poor book line and were getting crushed. I called the TD (Mike Valvo) over to resign (that was a requirement at ACM events, resignations had to be approved by the TD or the game had to continue). I said "Mike, we are at -7, deep thought is at +5. We'd like to resign. We have had this score for several moves in a row now. He stopped, studied the position, and said "play on, Bob." I asked "why". He responded "look at the board. material is equal. We have several hundred people watching in the playing hall here. Many think this game is going just fine for both sides. Wait until you actually lose the piece and pawns on the board, then everyone will understand why you are resigning." That seems to fit game 3, IMHO. > >Martin is right that GK is hardly likely to do soemthing that will change the >result. Just look at game two before you say that. Simple blunder a 1500 player would spot in seconds. It _does_ happen. Perhaps not often, but not often != never. > His plan was already underway with the doubling of the rooks on the >a-file, so no doubts can be had about his victory IMO. Especially with a certain >king on h8. Still, as stated above, though for different reasons, I agree the >game should have been played out a bit longer until a clear variation could be >pasted with the last move, and not a "this is how the game _might_ go". > > Albert
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.