Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 00:35:44 07/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 20, 2004 at 02:44:33, Roy Brunjes wrote: >Earlier I posted about this position with the question "Is the exchange >sacrifice 13. ... Rxf4!? sound?" > >[D] r1b3k1/pp2n1b1/1qn1prpp/2pp4/5B1P/2PP1NP1/PPQ2PB1/RN3RK1 b - - 0 13 > >Some readers thought it should be, others were not so convinced they would play >it themselves in a game (not necessarily a vote for or against the soundness, >just that they might not play that move themselves in a game). > >I'm a weak player myself, so I thought I would have the programs play it out to >see how things went when pitting various engines against Chessmaster. I started >the games shown below after Black's 14th move. The assumption here is that >White cannot afford to decline the sacrifice as he would be a piece down. Below >are the first 14 moves as originally played between Shredder 8 on a 2.8 GHz >Pentium IV and Chessmaster 9000 (Personality=SKR_JR_MIX which is my own creation >that is derived from the SKR personality developed by Kurt and others) which ran >when this game was originally played on my Centrino 1.5 GHz laptop. > >Today, to make things more interesting and to try to lend more weight to the >argument that 13. ... Rxf4 is indeed a very strong move, I ran Chessmaster on my >old Athlon 700 MHz machine while the other ChessBase engines (tried out one >after the other against Chessmaster on the 700 MHz Athlon) ran on my quite fast >Centrino 1.5 GHz laptop. Earlier tests I ran showed that my laptop is between 3 >and 4 times faster than the 700 MHz Athlon; thus the ChessBase engines had a >significant hardware advantage. If Chessmaster could achieve winning positions >aginst these engines while Chessmaster had a big hardware disadvantage, I think >it would lend more credibility to the argument that 13. ... Rxf4 is indeed a >very strong move (perhaps best?!) > > >The first 14 moves from the original game played between Shredder 8 and CM9000: > >1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 c5 3.g3 Nc6 4.c3 g6 5.Bg2 Bg7 6.Nf3 Nge7 7.0-0 d5 8.d3 0-0 9.e5 h6 >10.h4 Qb6 11.Bf4 f6 12.exf6 Rxf6 13.Qc2 Rxf4 14.gxf4 Bd7 > >Now I started Shredder 8 up on my machine (a Centrino 1.5 GHz and slightly >faster than what Shredder 8 ran on during this ICC game the other day). > >Here is how that game went: > >15.Na3 Rf8 16.Qd2 Qc7 17.h5 Rxf4 18.Rfe1 g5 19.Nb5 Qb8 20.Qe2 Nf5 21.Rac1 g4 >22.Nd2 g3 23.fxg3 Nxg3 24.Qe3 Nf5 25.Qe2 a6 26.Na3 Ncd4 27.Qd1 c4 28.Naxc4 Qa7 >29.Ne3 Nxe3 30.Rxe3 Nf5 31.Qe2 Qxe3+ 32.Qxe3 Nxe3 33.Bf3 Nf5 34.d4 Nh4 35.Be2 e5 >36.dxe5 Bxe5 37.Rf1 Rxf1+ 38.Kxf1 d4 39.cxd4 Bxd4 40.b3 Kf8 41.Nf3 Nxf3 42.Bxf3 >b6 43.Ke2 Ke7 44.Kd3 Bf6 45.Be2 Bb5+ 46.Ke3 Bxe2 47.Kxe2 Ke6 48.Kf2 Kf5 49.Kf3 >Kg5 50.Kf2 Kxh5 0-1 > >Hmm... Shredder 8 is no slouch as CCC readers and others well know. > >Next I tried Hiarcs 8 to see if its positional knowledge might help it avoid >problems in this position (again, starting after Black's 14th move). Here are >the moves of that game: > >15.Na3 Rf8 16.Qd2 Qc7 17.Nb5 Qb8 18.Qe3 Rxf4 19.Bh3 Nf5 20.Bxf5 Rxf5 21.Rae1 a6 >22.Na3 d4 23.cxd4 cxd4 24.Qe4 Rf4 25.Qe2 Qf8 26.Nh2 e5 27.Rd1 Rxh4 28.f3 Be6 >29.Nc4 Qf4 30.Nd6 Bxa2 31.Nxb7 Qg5+ 32.Qg2 Qe7 33.Ra1 Bf7 34.Na5 Nb4 35.Qd2 Rh5 >36.Rf2 Nd5 37.Nc6 Qh4 38.Rxa6 Qg3+ 39.Kh1 Nf4 40.b4 Bf8 41.Ra5 Rxh2+ 42.Rxh2 >Qxf3+ 43.Kg1 Qxc6 44.Rxe5 Qf3 45.Re4 Bd6 46.Rxd4 Bd5 47.Rxd5 Nxd5 48.Rf2 Qg4+ >49.Kf1 Qh3+ 50.Kg1 Bg3 51.Rf3 Bh2+ 52.Kf2 Bg1+ 53.Kxg1 Qxf3 54.Qc2 Qg4+ 55.Kh2 >Nxb4 56.Qb3+ Kf8 57.Qc3 Qe2+ 58.Kg1 Qd1+ 59.Kg2 Qc2+ 60.Qxc2 Nxc2 61.Kg3 Nb4 0-1 > >And again, Chessmaster on the much slower hardware is victorious. > >And now for Fritz 8.0.0.23 (same deal -- first 14 moves as before): > >15.Bh3 Rf8 16.Re1 Rxf4 17.Nbd2 Nf5 18.Kg2 Qd8 19.Bxf5 Rxf5 20.Rad1 Qb8 21.Qb3 b6 >22.Re3 Qf4 23.Rg1 Ne5 24.Qc2 Nxf3 25.Rxf3 Qxh4 26.Rg3 Ba4 27.b3 Bb5 28.Nf3 Qf4 >29.d4 g5 30.Re1 h5 31.Ne5 Bxe5 32.Rxe5 h4 33.Rge3 Rf6 34.Kh1 Be8 35.Qe2 Bg6 >36.Kg1 Bh5 37.Qf1 Bf3 38.Qh3 Be4 39.Qf1 Qg4+ 40.Kh2 Kf7 41.R5xe4 dxe4 and White >is definitely in deep trouble here. I ran out of energy at this point ... > >So, with three very strong ChessBase engines all having much faster hardware >than Chessmaster, I have to believe this strongly suggests that in fact 13. ... >Rxf4 is a very strong and sound move. > >Of course shoot-outs like this are not definitive, but short of hiring a GM to >analyze this I do not think it is easy to know for sure. I do not think any GMs >read CCC, but if you are out there, go ahead and take a shot at it please!! > >I also believe this might make an interesting test position for engine >developers... > >Regards, > >Roy thank you for your definitely interesting test. It seems it is indeed an interesting testposition. regards Joachim
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.