Author: Derek Paquette
Date: 15:56:43 05/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 30, 2004 at 18:22:12, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: >On May 30, 2004 at 15:54:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 30, 2004 at 15:11:10, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>>On May 30, 2004 at 14:58:45, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>> >>> >>>New game >>>r2q1rk1/pp1bbppp/2n1pn2/3p4/2PP4/1P1B1N2/PB1N1PPP/2RQ1RK1 b - - 0 1 >>> >>>Analysis by Shredder 8: >>> >>>1. ² (0.28): 1...Nh5 2.Re1 Nf4 3.Bb1 Qa5 4.Qc2 g6 5.Qc3 Qxc3 6.Rxc3 Bb4 7.Rce3 >>>Ba5 >>>2. ² (0.47): 1...Qa5 2.a3 dxc4 3.bxc4 Rad8 4.Qb3 Qh5 5.Rfe1 Na5 6.Qc2 Nc6 7.Ne4 >>>Ng4 8.Ng3 >> >>So Shredder says it is .19 worse than Qa5, which _also_ looks a bit suspect... >> >>I'm not sure what this proves, if anything. I personally like Nh5 better than >>Qa5... As black I'd like to start something on the king-side. Whether it is f6 >>and e5 or f5 directly doesn't matter as the knight has to get out of the way >>first anyway... >> >> >>> >>>(Pichard, MyTown 30.05.2004) >>> >>> >>>>Kasparov-Deep Blue >>>>Philadelphia (6) 1996 >>>> >>>> >>>>The Opening has been a sucess for Kasparov. He has good central control, and >>>>prospects of a gradual queenside advance. More importantly, there is no direct >>>>plan for Black, so Deep Blue drifts for a few moves with disastrous >>>>consequences. The bishop is already a little clumpsy on d7; I suspect a strong >>>>human player would have sunk into thought, and devised a plan for deliverating >>>>his game. >>>> >>>>[D]r2q1rk1/pp1bbppp/2n1pn2/3p4/2PP4/1P1B1N2/PB1N1PPP/2RQ1RK1 b - - 0 1 >>>> >>>>11...Nh5? >>>>This over-ambitious idea met with strong disapproval from most strong human >>>>commentators. However, Yasser Seirawan said "oddly enough, one well-known chess >>>>computer scientist suggested that the move may well be OK, but it might need a >>>>highly advandce program and computer in a few years' time to justify this move". >>>>I suspect that this is a case in point of someone believing that a strong >>>>chess-playing program is doing something profound, when in fact is just >>>>crunching numbers, Few GMs back in 1996 felt that 11....Nh5 was anything other >>>>than a bad move. >It proves a lot ,in particular how bad deep Blue was.Once again you seem to >praise Deep Blue without facing the facts.This game has been subject of analysis >by me and I have reached the conclusion that the reason it lost was that it did >not play dxc4 at some point(lack of chess Knowledge).And Oh....before I forget >.....Your chess rating is very low compared to Vincents (which is about 2300 >FIDE) so I cannot take your comments about chess moves seriously. Shredder 8 agrees with the move, and its the number 1 program in the world.
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.