Author: John Merlino
Date: 10:51:08 04/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 27, 2004 at 09:28:37, Dan Ellwein wrote: >On April 27, 2004 at 08:09:24, Dan Ellwein wrote: > >>On April 27, 2004 at 01:53:35, John Merlino wrote: >> >>>On April 26, 2004 at 21:48:57, Dan Ellwein wrote: >>> >>>>On April 25, 2004 at 18:22:46, Johan de Koning wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 24, 2004 at 18:21:31, Johan de Koning wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 24, 2004 at 15:28:13, John Merlino wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 23, 2004 at 20:05:51, Johan de Koning wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On April 23, 2004 at 16:52:42, John Merlino wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>This position is from The King v Diep in the recent ICT4. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>[D]r3k2r/pp1bppbp/2n3p1/8/8/2N1B1P1/PP2PPBP/2RK3R w kq - 0 13 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The Chessmaster 9000 database has two games with this position, played by top >>>>>>>>>GMs (Andersson v Leko in 1996 and Smirin v Alterman in 1998). In both cases, >>>>>>>>>White played f4 and won. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The King, however, chose Kc2 and is soon forced over to a3. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Actually I cheered when TK switched to Kc2 at the last minute (make that >>>>>>>>the last second :-). Both a3 and a1/b1 look better then e1, superficially. >>>>>>>>Little did I know what lied ahead though. :-( >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>... Johan >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Did TK switch from f4 or Ke1? >>>>>> >>>>>>I don't recall seeing f4 in any of the PVs. >>>>>>(Will correct tomorrow, if needed.) >>>>> >>>>>So much for my memory. >>>>>It switched from f4 to Kc2. >>>>>In 3-best mode it lists Kc3, f4, and h4 within a few cents. >>>>>(on slower hardware) >>>>>252.33 45M289 03/12 +0.07 Kc2,Bf5+ Kb3,0-0 Rhd1,Rfd8 Rxd8+,Rxd8 Bxc6,bxc6 ... >>>>>305.83 54M957 03/12 -0.01 f4,Rc8 Kd2,0-0 Rhd1,Bf5 Ke1,e5 fxe5,Bxe5 Kf2,Rfe8 >>>>>383.66 68M885 03/12 +0.03 h4,Rd8 Ke1,h5 Kf1,0-0 Kg1,Be6 Kh2,Rfe8 Rhe1,Rd7 >>>>> >>>>>... Johan >>>> >>>>Hi Johan >>>> >>>>just for the record CM9_OffSet likes Kc2 in this position... >>>> >>>>P3/850 >>>> >>>>Time Depth Score Positions Moves >>>>---- ---- ---- ---- ---- >>>>0:00 1/3 0.48 4930 1.Nb5 Rd8 2.Nc7+ Kf8 >>>>0:00 1/3 0.49 5409 1.f4 O-O 2.Rf1 Rfc8 >>>>0:00 1/4 0.49 8181 1.f4 O-O 2.Rf1 Rfc8 >>>>0:00 1/4 0.55 17208 1.Nd5 Rd8 2.b3 Kf8 >>>>0:00 1/5 0.29 36913 1.Nd5 Rd8 2.Kc2 Bf5+ 3.Kb3 Nd4+ >>>> 4.Bxd4 Bxd4 >>>>0:00 1/5 0.53 47262 1.Nb5 Rd8 2.Kc2 O-O 3.Nxa7 Bf5+ >>>> 4.Kb3 >>>>0:01 1/6 0.68 90706 1.Nb5 Rd8 2.Ke1 a5 3.f4 Bxb2 >>>>0:02 1/7 0.29 219503 1.Nb5 O-O 2.Nxa7 Nxa7 3.Bxb7 Rad8 >>>> 4.Ke1 Bxb2 >>>>0:03 1/7 0.42 329111 1.Nd5 Rd8 2.Bd2 Kf8 3.Bc3 Nd4 4.Bb4 >>>> Nf5 >>>>0:07 1/7 0.60 632608 1.Kc2 Bf5+ 2.Be4 Bxe4+ 3.Nxe4 f5 >>>> 4.Nc5 O-O-O 5.Kb1 e5 >>>>0:10 1/8 0.66 900983 1.Kc2 O-O 2.Kb1 Rfc8 3.Rhd1 Bf5+ >>>> 4.Be4 Bg4 5.f4 e6 >>>>0:22 1/8 0.70 1997546 1.Na4 Bf5 2.Ke1 Rc8 3.b3 Bd7 4.Nc5 >>>> Bb2 5.Rd1 >>>>0:30 1/9 0.68 2770742 1.Na4 Bf5 2.Rg1 Rc8 3.Bxc6+ bxc6 >>>> 4.Ke1 Rc7 5.g4 Be6 >>>>0:38 1/9 0.82 3570621 1.Kc2 O-O 2.Rhd1 Bf5+ 3.Be4 Bg4 >>>> 4.Kb1 Rfc8 5.f3 Be6 6.Nd5 >>>>0:51 1/10 0.78 4873139 1.Kc2 O-O 2.Rhd1 Bf5+ 3.Be4 Bh3 >>>> 4.Kb1 Rfc8 5.f4 Be6 6.Nb5 >>>>2:16 1/11 0.87 12968586 1.Kc2 O-O-O 2.Kb1 Kb8 3.Rhd1 Rhe8 >>>> 4.f4 Nb4 5.Ne4 Be6 6.Rxd8+ Rxd8 >>>>5:07 1/12 0.95 29377143 1.Kc2 O-O 2.Rhd1 Be6 3.Kb1 Rfc8 >>>> 4.Nd5 Bf5+ 5.Ka1 Kf8 6.Nf4 Kg8 >>>> 7.Bxc6 bxc6 >>>>13:41 2/13 1.04 78101462 1.Kc2 O-O 2.Rhd1 Bg4 3.Kb1 Rfc8 >>>> 4.Bc5 Kf8 5.f4 Bf5+ 6.Be4 b6 7.Bxf5 >>>> gxf5 8.Be3 e6 >>>>best regards, >>>> >>>>Dan >>> >>>An eval of >1.0 shows how very odd this personality is. It might be useful for >>>finding sacrifices, but for general analysis I wouldn't trust it at all. The >>>final PV doesn't even show Diep's obvious follow-up of 1...Bf5+. >>> >>>jm >> >>yes John agree... >> >>this personality shines best in positions rich in tactics... >> >>thanks for replying >> >>Dan > >okay John > >just out of curiosity I changed 2 parameters: > >Attack/Defense=0 (instead of-40) > >Material/Positional=15 (instead of 0) > >and here's the output... > >P3/850 > >Time Depth Score Positions Moves >0:00 1/3 0.43 3670 1.f4 O-O-O 2.Ke1 Be6 3.Bxc6 bxc6 > 4.Bxa7 >0:00 1/4 0.45 7321 1.f4 O-O-O 2.Ke1 Kb8 >0:00 1/5 0.30 21264 1.f4 O-O-O 2.Ke1 Kb8 3.Bc5 >0:00 1/5 0.31 55634 1.Kc2 Bf5+ 2.Kb3 Be6+ 3.Ka3 O-O > 4.Rhd1 Rac8 >0:01 1/6 0.31 100542 1.Kc2 Bf5+ 2.Kb3 Rc8 3.Ka3 O-O > 4.Rhd1 Be6 >0:01 1/6 0.35 120785 1.f4 Be6 2.Ke1 O-O 3.Kf2 Rac8 4.Rhd1 > >0:03 1/7 0.35 273944 1.f4 Be6 2.Ke1 O-O 3.Kf2 Rac8 4.Rhd1 > >0:07 1/8 0.38 641179 1.f4 O-O 2.Ke1 Rfd8 3.Kf2 Be6 4.Rhd1 > Bxc3 5.bxc3 Bxa2 >0:19 1/9 0.30 1631776 1.f4 O-O 2.Ke1 Rfd8 3.Kf2 Be6 4.Rhd1 > Rxd1 5.Rxd1 Rc8 >0:25 1/9 0.36 2204417 1.Kc2 Bf5+ 2.Ne4 O-O-O 3.Kb1 Bd4 > 4.Rhf1 Kb8 5.Bf4+ Be5 6.Bxe5+ Nxe5 > 7.Rfd1 Rxd1 8.Rxd1 >1:01 1/10 0.36 5498413 1.Kc2 Bf5+ 2.Kb3 O-O 3.Rhd1 h6 > 4.Nd5 e6 5.Nc7 Rac8 6.Bxc6 bxc6 > 7.Rxc6 >2:45 1/11 0.37 15134721 1.Kc2 Bf5+ 2.Kb3 O-O 3.Rhd1 Rfd8 > 4.Ka3 e6 5.Rxd8+ Rxd8 6.Bxc6 bxc6 > 7.Bxa7 Bf8+ 8.Kb3 e5 >5:37 1/12 0.28 31729258 1.Kc2 Bf5+ 2.Kb3 O-O 3.Rhd1 Rfd8 > 4.Nd5 Bg4 5.f3 Be6 6.f4 Bg4 7.Rc2 > Bf5 >13:12 1/12 0.31 72228683 1.h4 h5 2.Kc2 Bf5+ 3.Kb3 O-O 4.Rhd1 > Rac8 5.Ka3 Rfe8 6.b3 Red8 7.Rxd8+ > Rxd8 > >here Bf5+ is considered and the pv seems more reasonable... > >best regards, > >Dan This is no surprise to me. Taking away the personality's fairly strong desire to attack, and taking away (some of) its highly skewed material value settings (where a piece is equal to two pawns, IIRC) would make it play more reasonably. But that's not the point of the personality in the first place.... :-) jm
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.