Author: John Merlino
Date: 18:05:20 07/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 19, 2004 at 15:53:17, Daniel Jackson wrote: >On July 19, 2004 at 14:10:09, John Merlino wrote: > >>On July 19, 2004 at 03:44:44, Daniel Jackson wrote: >> >>>Patzers:) >>> >>>Here I win with mate in 18 moves and my play is lazy, not good play, still it's >>>enough to kill instant movers:) >>> >>>[Event ""] >>>[Site ""] >>>[Date "2004.7.19"] >>>[Round ""] >>>[White "Jackson"] >>>[Black "Vlad"] >>>[TimeControl "300"] >>>[Result "1-0"] >>> >>>1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nce7 4.c4 Ng6 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Bd3 Nf6 7.Ne2 O-O 8.Bg5 >>>h6 9.h4 hxg5 10.hxg5 Ng4 11.Nf4 Nxf4 12.Qxg4 Nxd3+ 13.Kf1 d6 14.Qh5 Bh3 >>>15.Rxh3 f5 16.g6 Qh4 17.Rxh4 Bxc3 18.Qh7# 1-0 >>> >>>My computer is slow but even if it were very fast, I doubt the difference would >>>be significant, when CM moves so quickly. >>> >>>Daniel >>> >>>P.S. >>> >>>Now to see if I can mate Vlad (1861), grin...in 15 moves or less;-) >> >>The problem move is 13...d6. CM_SKR shows an eval of -2.95 for Black with >>13...Nf4 before that move, and a Mate in 5 for White after that move! >> >>And, as another user pointed out, it is the limited search depth that causes >>this (and the instant moves). Vlad's search depth is limited to 3 plies. Vlad >>also has a big mobility value, which is why he probably preferred playing d6 to >>open the diagonal for the bishop and attack your queen. He just couldn't see the >>mate a mere 9 plies away. >> >>jm > >John I know...I was just screwing around with an instant player in the wee hours >as some posted a short while back that the instant movers unsettled them and >cost them games. I took about a min. and Vlad less or no more than 2 sec., it >isn't meant to show the power of CM which is quite amazing at times and not an >easy opponent at all. Actually, I've seen Class A players (and perhaps even a master, although he wouldn't admit it) lose to LACEY! So, there is definitely something pscyhologically disturbing when your opponent makes a seemingly good move instantly EVERY MOVE. Of course, if you are not susceptible to these things, it makes it much easier to win. >CM5000 is weak compared to Johan's CM9K or CM10. > >I was still winning many G/5s in those days, now it's very very tough! >And I'm not getting younger either....:( But computers are getting a lot faster! So that could be the main reason. I would say that, run on the same hardware, the engine in CM5000 is no more than 300 points weaker than the engine in CM9000 -- probably about 2350-2400 USCF --still impossible for an average patzer like me! 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.