Author: Vincent Lejeune
Date: 16:14:35 09/02/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2004 at 03:43:50, Vincent Lejeune wrote: >On September 01, 2004 at 19:53:53, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>I would be very interested in the "more later", if possible. Maybe the computers >>which get h4 quick sometimes change their mind, and then come back again to h4 >>with much more certainty. I've seen that happen from this position. > >I'll let Chessmaster think on it next night (reponse in 24 from now) >I'm reposting all the test positions, with comments : > >find h4! and don't lose it after 15 min >[d]2kr3r/ppp1qpp1/2p5/2b2b1p/2P1pPn1/1P2P1PP/PBQPB3/RN2K2R b KQ - 0 12 CM10 (amd@3000+) doesn't lose it after 25 min : Time Depth Score Positions Moves 0:32 1/11 -0.92 8541987 1...h4 2.Bxg4 Bxg4 3.hxg4 hxg3 4.Rg1 Rh2 5.Qc3 Qh4 6.Qxg7 Rh1 7.Rxh1 Qxh1+ 8.Ke2 Bxe3 1:19 1/12 -1.75 20461179 1...h4 2.Bxg4 Bxg4 3.hxg4 hxg3 4.Rg1 Rh2 5.Nc3 Bxe3 6.O-O-O Bxg1 7.Rxg1 Rdxd2 8.Qxd2 Rxd2 9.Kxd2 Qd6+ 10.Kc2 Qxf4 2:38 1/13 -1.72 42207857 1...h4 2.Bxg4 Bxg4 3.hxg4 hxg3 4.Rg1 Rh2 5.Nc3 Rdxd2 6.Qxd2 Rxd2 7.Kxd2 Qd8+ 8.Ke1 Bxe3 9.Rg2 Bf2+ 10.Kf1 Qd2 11.Rd1 Qxb2 12.Nxe4 Qxa2 13.Nxf2 gxf2 6:38 2/14 -1.72 109858966 1...h4 2.Bxg4 Bxg4 3.hxg4 hxg3 4.Rg1 Rh2 5.Nc3 Rdxd2 6.Qxd2 Rxd2 7.Kxd2 Qd8+ 8.Ke1 Bxe3 9.Rg2 Bf2+ 10.Kf1 Qd2 11.Rd1 Qxb2 12.Nxe4 Qxa2 13.Nxf2 gxf2 15:56 2/15 -1.72 271571404 1...h4 2.Bxg4 Bxg4 3.hxg4 hxg3 4.Rg1 Rh2 5.Nc3 Rdxd2 6.Qxd2 Rxd2 7.Kxd2 Qd8+ 8.Ke1 Bxe3 9.Rg2 Bf2+ 10.Kf1 Qd2 11.Rd1 Qxb2 12.Nxe4 Qxa2 13.Nxf2 gxf2 > >> >>It might even be that there is stronger variation against 13.Bxg4, and best >>would be 13.Rg1. > >what's the best move here (after 12...h4) ? >[d]2kr3r/ppp1qpp1/2p5/2b2b2/2P1pPnp/1P2P1PP/PBQPB3/RN2K2R w KQ - 0 13 Chessmaster10 (amd@3000+), 3 best moves after 10 min Bxg4 still the best : Time Depth Score Positions Moves 7:35 1/13 -1.72 112167844 13.Bxg4 Bxg4 14.hxg4 hxg3 15.Rg1 Rh2 16.Nc3 Rdxd2 17.Qxd2 Rxd2 18.Kxd2 Qd8+ 19.Ke1 Bxe3 20.Rg2 Bf2+ 21.Kf1 Qd2 22.Rd1 Qxb2 23.Nxe4 Qxa2 24.Nxf2 gxf2 8:42 1/13 -3.29 129944264 13.Rg1 Nxe3 14.dxe3 hxg3 15.Nd2 Bxe3 16.O-O-O Rxd2 17.Rxd2 Bxg1 18.Qc3 Rxh3 19.Rd1 Bf2 20.Qxg7 10:16 1/13 -3.40 158080904 13.Nc3 hxg3 14.Bxg4 Bxg4 15.Qxe4 Qh4 16.Qg2 Bxh3 17.Rxh3 Qxh3 18.Qxh3+ Rxh3 19.Ne4 Bf8 20.Ke2 Rh2+ 21.Kf3 g2 22.Rc1 > >> >>I'm also still interested about 10....Ng4 >find 10...Ng4 >[d]2kr3r/ppp1qppp/2p2n2/2b2b2/2P1pP2/1P2P3/PBQPB1PP/RN2K2R b KQ f3 0 10 CM10 doesn't find Ng4 after 9 min Time Depth Score Positions Moves 0:44 1/11 -0.52 11122685 10...Qd7 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.Nc3 Ba3 13.g4 Bxg4 14.Nxe4 Bxe2 15.Kxe2 Qg4+ 16.Kf2 Rhg8 17.Ng3 0:55 1/11 -0.61 13705041 10...Kb8 11.a3 Bb6 12.O-O c5 13.Nc3 Ba5 14.Rac1 Rhg8 15.Rce1 Qd6 2:27 1/12 -0.56 37284312 10...Kb8 11.a3 Bb6 12.Nc3 c5 13.b4 cxb4 14.axb4 Qxb4 15.Ba3 Qa5 16.Bb2 Qc5 17.O-O 2:58 1/12 -0.59 45796211 10...Qd7 11.a3 Be7 12.O-O h5 13.b4 Kb8 14.Bd4 c5 15.Bxc5 Bxc5 16.bxc5 Qc6 17.Nc3 Qxc5 7:18 1/13 -0.57 112890685 10...Qd7 11.a3 Be7 12.Be5 h5 13.Ra2 h4 14.Nc3 h3 15.Rg1 Rdg8 16.g3 Re8 > >>and 11....h5, although I doubt very >>much in a computer ever playing them, even if they are tactically very great. >find 11...h5 >[d]2kr3r/ppp1qppp/2p5/2b2b2/2P1pPn1/1P2P1P1/PBQPB2P/RN2K2R b KQ - 0 11 14:25 for CM10 Time Depth Score Positions Moves 0:12 1/10 -0.46 3203232 11...Nf6 12.a3 a5 13.Nc3 h5 14.Na4 Ba7 15.Qc3 b6 16.Qe5 Qxe5 17.Bxe5 0:39 1/11 -0.49 9966434 11...Nf6 12.a3 a5 13.O-O Rhe8 14.b4 axb4 15.axb4 Bxb4 16.Ra8+ Kd7 17.Ra7 Ra8 18.Bxf6 Qxf6 19.Rxb7 1:41 1/12 -0.52 26643039 11...Nf6 12.a3 a5 13.O-O h5 14.b4 axb4 15.axb4 Bxb4 16.Ra8+ Kd7 17.Ra7 h4 18.g4 Nxg4 19.Rxb7 6:04 1/13 -0.44 98613688 11...Nf6 12.a3 Qe6 13.b4 Be7 14.c5 Bh3 15.Rg1 Bg4 16.Bc4 Qd7 17.Bxf7 Bxc5 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.bxc5 Qxf7 20.Qxe4 14:25 1/13 -0.47 240587684 11...h5 12.Bxg7 Rh7 13.Qc3 Qd6 14.Be5 Nxe5 15.fxe5 Qg6 16.O-O Kb8 17.b4 Be7 > >>> >>>>Huh? That's quick! However, I would be even more impressed if I would see that >>>>it found 14....Rh1 or 15....Rh1 from the same position in a short time. >>>>Could you test it for that? >>>>And what kind of AMD and Mhz are you using? >>>> >>>> >>>>[Later, I would be staggeringly fascinated to know if your computer EVER arrives >>>>at the (possibly best moves) of 10...Ng4 and/or 11...h5. If so, I might even >>>>propose that computers have almost solved chess!] >>>> >>>>Thanks! >>>>S.Taylor
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.