Author: Lanny DiBartolomeo
Date: 22:39:00 12/13/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 1998 at 23:50:48, Laurence Chen wrote: >I am getting tired of hearing people making statements that their chess engine >is the most dynamic and it plays sacrifices for the initiative. Really?! I say >that is not always true, I believe that most of the sac which the chess engine >performs are pseudo sacrifices and very very very few indeed are true or real >sacrifices. I would suspect that Chess System Tal would be an exception because >I've seen games which CST makes lots of sacrifices,it knows no fear. I have the >following position for all of you CM 6000 supporters which claim that CM always >create winning situations and is always ready to perform a sacrifice for the >initiative. I've seen the type of sacrifices which CM performs, most of them are >pseudo-sacrifices, I've yet to see one which is a true sacrifice. So here's my >challenge to all of you CM supporters which claim that CM always make sacrifices >for the initiative, I would like you to get a copy of the book, Modern Chess >Sacrifice, by Leonid Shamkovich, and test all the positions in the book and tell >me how many true sacrifices CM finds. Seriously, before you make any claim make >sure you got some proof to back up your statement. I give the following >position: r1bq1rk1/pp2nppp/4p3/2n5/8/2NBPN2/PP3PPP/R2Q1RK1 w - - 1 0. It is from >the book mentioned above, the game between Capablanca and Molina, Buenos Aires, >1911. Capablanca anotates this game in his book, My Chess Career. >My chess engines, Fritz 5.16, Junior 5, and CM 6000 failed to find the best move >which Capablanca played. You guessed right, it is a sacrifice, and the chess >engines I used failed to find the best move 12. Bxh7+! >The game continued with the following moves, 12. ... Kxh7 13. Ng5+ Kg6 14. Qg4 >f5 15. Qg3 Kh6 16. Qh3+ Kg6 17. Qh7+ Kf6. Quoting the book anotations to this >position, "White's operation has finally lost all the clarity and unambiguity of >a combination. Black has repulsed the first onslaught, is a piece up, and even >threatens to win White's Queen with 18. ... Rh8. White has several tempting >options of attack: 18. Rad1, 18. Qh4, and others. But which one should he >choose?" And once again in this position CM 6000 fails to find the best move 18. >e4!. I probably will get a lot of yeah but, surely there are positions which CM >will find sacs, my question is it a true sacrifice or a pseudo one? Pawn sacs >are very common, so please don't give me examples of pawn sacs. So besides CST >which I would suspect that it would play the move 12. Bxh7!, I could be wrong, I >would like to know if other chess engines are able to solve this position which >started as very quiet and simple and changed to a complex one. I dont remember reading a post that anyone said it always makes sacrifices and alot of times a sacrifice yes even in books are not the correct move. in your earlier post about Garry Kasparov saying b3 was the best move and cm6000 didnt play it nor did some other but fritz5 played it I say then play cm6000 against fritz5 from that position on and see which program wins Id think fritz5 would since the position is dynamic and since you figure cm6000 to be a static thinker that should then shall we say be right up fritz's ally and against cm6000 true?
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.