Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 07:57:13 11/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 2003 at 10:08:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 17, 2003 at 18:08:03, Amir Ban wrote: > >>On November 17, 2003 at 11:56:51, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>>On November 17, 2003 at 08:13:26, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>> >>>>On November 17, 2003 at 07:58:59, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>> >>>>>I kept reading from Mig that not too many programs would have known what plan to >>>>>make, such as moving the Knight from f6 and advancing the f pawn down. Most >>>>>human players, even weak players know that if your opponent has the center lock >>>>>and is advancing pawns or playing on one side of the board, your best plan would >>>>>be to play on the other side of the board, not with your pieces but with your >>>>>pawns. My question to this forum is how many other top programs would have >>>>>chosen the correct plan? >>>>> >>>> >>>>[D]rnb2rk1/1p1nbppp/1Pp1q3/N1Pp4/1B1Pp3/P1N1P2P/1R3PP1/3QKB1R b K - 0 1 >>>> >>>>Kasparov,G - X3D Fritz >>>>rnb2rk1/1p1nbppp/1Pp1q3/N1Pp4/1B1Pp3/P1N1P2P/1R3PP1/3QKB1R b K - 0 1 >>>> >>>>Analysis by Falcon: >>>> >>>>20...Na6 21.Bxa6 Rxa6 22.0-0 >>>> ² (0.69) Depth: 3/7 00:00:00 >>>>20...Na6 21.Bxa6 Rxa6 22.0-0 Bh4 >>>> ² (0.59) Depth: 4/9 00:00:00 >>>>20...Na6 21.Bxa6 Rxa6 22.0-0 Qf5 23.Qg4 >>>> ± (0.76) Depth: 5/10 00:00:00 >>>>20...f5 21.Qh5 Nf6 22.Qg5 Nbd7 >>>> ± (0.73) Depth: 5/23 00:00:00 >>>>20...f5 21.Nb3 f4 22.Qg4 Qh6 23.Kd2 fxe3+ 24.fxe3 >>>> ² (0.60) Depth: 6/23 00:00:00 27kN >>>>20...f5 21.Be2 f4 22.exf4 Rxf4 23.Bg4 Qf7 24.0-0 >>>> ± (0.74) Depth: 7/23 00:00:00 49kN >>>>20...Nf6 21.f4 exf3 22.Qxf3 Re8 23.Bd3 Nbd7 >>>> ± (0.72) Depth: 7/23 00:00:00 97kN >>>>20...Nf6 21.Ne2 Na6 22.Nf4 Qd7 23.Bc3 g5 24.Nh5 >>>> ± (0.83) Depth: 8/23 00:00:01 167kN >>>>20...f5 21.Ne2 g5 22.Nc3 Na6 23.Bxa6 Rxa6 24.0-0 f4 >>>> ² (0.61) Depth: 8/23 00:00:02 311kN >>>>20...f5 21.Be2 Na6 22.0-0 Nxb4 23.axb4 Bh4 24.Qd2 Qg6 25.g3 >>>> ± (0.74) Depth: 9/24 00:00:03 568kN >>>>20...f5 21.Be2 Na6 22.0-0 Qg6 23.Qd2 Bh4 24.Ra2 Nxb4 25.axb4 Re8 >>>> ² (0.69) Depth: 10/28 00:00:08 1328kN >>>>20...Na6 21.Bxa6 Rxa6 22.0-0 f5 23.f4 Qg6 24.g4 Qh6 25.Rh2 Qe6 >>>> ² (0.67) Depth: 10/28 00:00:09 1451kN >>>>20...Na6 21.Bxa6 Rxa6 22.0-0 f5 23.Ne2 Nf6 24.Qc2 Nh5 25.Rbb1 Qg6 26.g3 >>>> ± (0.74) Depth: 11/28 00:00:12 1989kN >>>>20...f5 21.Be2 Bg5 22.h4 Be7 23.Qd2 Na6 24.Ra2 Re8 25.Qc2 Nxb4 26.axb4 >>>> ± (0.73) Depth: 11/31 00:00:19 2964kN >>>> >>>>(David Tabibi, MyTown 17.11.2003) >>>>PIII/733MHz >>>> >>> >>> >>>Thanks for replying, I still think that at move 20...f5 was not too late to >>>save the game! >>> >>>Jorge >> >>Too late ? You must be joking. Black could play it any time in the next 15 >>moves. >> >>I don't understand this fixation on f5. What's wrong with any other pawn advance >>? Black can play h5, g5, f5, and take it from there, any time during the game. >>What is white going to do about it ? > >Play g4 and h4. Notice where _black's_ king is. Notice where white's king >is. White can play g4/h4 to increase his space over there if black doesn't >get something started reasonably quickly. The problem here is that if black >doesn't push a pawn, he shuffles a piece. That gives white a free move. >Enough free moves and black dies on _both_ sides of the board. Falcon wanted to play h4 and g4 for white in some points, but I think that would be a severe mistake. Even though white's king is in queenside and black's king in kingside, any files opened in the kingside will be to black's benefit. The fact that black's king is there is totally irrelevant. A good example is the Samisch variation of the King's Indian Defense where white castles queenside and black castles kingside. Then black opens the files f and g, even though his king is there. And white advances his queenside pawns. The space black has in the kingside provides sufficient protection for his king. [D]r1bq1rk1/pppn2bp/3p2p1/3Ppp1n/2P1P3/2N1BP2/PP1Q2PP/2KR1BNR w - f6 0 10 > >> >>I think this game was a low swindle by Kasparov. He played a dubious line based >>on preparation that showed Fritz will not punish him for it. He gave Fritz about >>20 free tempi (5 moves to capture the pawn, 5 to disentangle, 5 to move his king >>and 5 to break). >> >>This was not anti-computer strategy. Kasparov played computer strategy! Locking >>the position with a horribly cramped reverse chain, taking a worthless pawn and >>hoping the sky will not fall on its head is just what a computer is expected to >>do. >> >>Amir > >No argument there. But playing your "opponent" rather than the "board" is a >common enough idea...
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.