Author: jefkaan
Date: 10:31:29 11/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 18, 2003 at 13:03:38, jefkaan wrote: >7 ..a5 wasnt good; any *good* book would have >preferred 7.. g6 whereby i might add that Fritz may have been influence by the game Reshevsky-Keres, world championship 1948 which was exactly like Kasparov Fritz including 11. Be7, which gets a !? by ChessAssistant (.. g6 is preferred, at least in my CA 7.1 database, whereby ChessTigerIII is finding Ndb8!? by own analysis. Then a small comment about the ridiculous move 15.. Be7?? (personally i dont think Bd6 was that bad, but maybe i overlook something); after Kasparovs Rb1, why didnt Fritz play Bb8, i wonder (probably the plan already the 'plan', eg. calculated line after the move Bd6). For example 15.. Bb8 16. Na5 Ne8! 17 Bb4 Qg5! etc. (0-1) Probably Fr. saw some other danger (?), and then without any embarrasment played Be7?? back (maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea for the programmers to give a move playing 'backwards' ie to the same field as they came from, one move ago, a *penalty* (except in zugzwang, eg. in the endgame)?) . Anyway it looks like this Fritz strangled itself in its nullmove algorithms or something like that; conclusion: poor book & still not such a good engine; hurray, still some work to do ! :)
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.