Author: Arturo Ochoa
Date: 08:55:37 07/09/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 09, 2004 at 11:34:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 09, 2004 at 11:21:53, Arturo Ochoa wrote: > >>On July 09, 2004 at 10:55:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On July 09, 2004 at 10:27:41, Tord Romstad wrote: >>> >>>>I haven't studied the Diep-Crafty game very closely, but didn't Diep have a >>>>clear advantage out of the opening? >>>> >>>>Tord >>> >>>Crafty was very close to zero (equal). >>> >>>Diep played the unusual cxd4 in the QGD, and at move 10 the search looked like >>>this, which seems reasonable for black (+=good for white): >>> >>> >> Incorrect, there is not unusual. > > >Actually it is unusual. Here are the stats from my own book, with several >million games in it: > > move played % score learn CAP sortv P% P > Nc3 27836 72 0.04 0.54 -655.36 2001.0 0 Y > Nf3 9263 24 0.04 0.00 -655.36 333.8 0 Y > cxd5? 657 1 -0.48 0.00 -655.36 24.6 0 N > g3? 431 1 -0.24 0.00 -655.36 16.5 0 N > e3? 219 0 -0.12 0.00 -655.36 8.9 0 N > a3? 44 0 -0.27 0.00 -655.36 2.6 0 N > c5? 31 0 -0.21 0.00 -655.36 2.1 0 N > e4? 30 0 0.03 0.00 -655.36 2.1 0 N > Bf4? 26 0 0.00 0.00 -655.36 1.9 0 N > >37,000 games with Nc3 or Nf3. 657 with cxd5. I'd call that "unusual". :) > Example, when talking about transpositions, the statistics are relevant for the resultant position. I mean: After 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. cxd dxd 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Bg5, you have the typical exchange line of the queen's gambit. Check your statistics after 5. Bg5.
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.