Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:04:42 07/09/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 09, 2004 at 11:55:37, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >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. I understand. I simply said "3. cxd5 is unusual." Unusual it is when considering it was played 600 times as opposed to 37,000 times for the more common replies.
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.