Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Thanks for the nice report Stan!

Author: Gerd Isenberg

Date: 12:25:13 10/25/04

Go up one level in this thread


< a bit snipped>
>A description of my Dutch open in Leiden.
>
>I enjoy reading tournamentreports from others, so this time I thought I would
>write my own, for those that are interested in amateur computerchess.

great!

>
>game 3, Xinix.
>
>[Event "24th DOCC"]
>[Date "2004.10.16"]
>[Round "03"]
>[White "Neurosis"]
>[Black "XiniX dubbel"]
>[Result "1-0"]
>
>1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nf3 Bg7 4. Nc3 d5 5. e3 O-O 6. Be2 c5 7. dxc5 Qa5 8.
>cxd5 Nxd5 9. Qxd5 Bxc3+ 10. Kf1 Bb4 11. a3 Bxc5 12. Bd2 Qb6 13. Rc1 Bd6 14.
>Ne5 e6 15. Qd4 Qxd4 16. exd4 f6 17. Nc4 Bc7 18. Bb4 Bf4 19. Rc3 Rd8 20. Be7
>Rxd4 21. Bxf6 Rd5 22. Ne3 Bxe3 23. Rxc8+ Kf7 24. Bc3 Rc5 25. Rxb8 Rxb8 26.
>fxe3 Rbc8 27. Kf2 e5 28. Rd1 Kf6 29. e4 R8c7 30. Ke3 Ke6 31. Bb4 Rc2 32.
>Rd6+ Kf7 33. Bc3 R7xc3+ 34. bxc3 Rxc3+ 35. Kd2 Rxa3 36. Rd7+ Kf6 37. Rxb7
>h5 38. Bc4 h4 39. Rf7+ Kg5 40. Re7 Kf4 41. Bd5 Ra6 42. Ke2 Rb6 43. Rf7+ Kg4
>44. Ke3 Rb2 45. Rg7 Kg5 46. Kf3 Rc2 47. Re7 Rc3+ 48. Ke2 Rc2+ 49. Ke3 Rxg2
>50. Rxe5+ Kh6 51. Kf3 Rxh2 52. Kg4 a5 53. Re6 Rh1 54. Ra6 Ra1 55. Kxh4 a4
>56. Bf7 Kg7 57. Be6 Kf6 58. Bf5+ Ke5 59. Bxg6 Kf4 60. Rf6+ Ke5 61. Ra6 Kf4
>62. Rf6+ Ke5 63. Rf5+ Kd4 64. Ra5 a3 65. Kh3 Kc4 66. Bf7+ Kb4 67. Ra7 Re1
>68. Bd5 Rg1 69. Kh4 Re1 70. Kg3 Rf1 71. Be6 Ra1 72. Kf4 Rd1 73. Bf7 Rf1+ 74.
>Ke5 Kc5 75. Bh5 Ra1 76. Bg4 Kb6 77. Ra4 Kc5 78. Be6 Kc6 79. Kd4 Kb5 80. Bd7+
>Kb6 81. Kc3 Kc7 82. Bf5 Kd6 83. Ra5 Rf1 84. Rxa3 Ke5 85. Kd2 Kf4 86. Ra7
>Rf2+ 87. Kd3 Rf1 88. Re7 Rd1+ 89. Ke2 Rc1 90. Kd3 Ra1 91. Bg6 Ra3+ 92. Kd4
>Ra4+ 93. Kd5 Ra5+ 94. Kd4 Ra4+ 95. Kd5 Ra5+ 96. Kc4 Kg5 97. Bf7 Kf6 98. Rb7
>Ke5 99. Kd3 Kf4 100. Kd4 Ra1 101. Bb3 Ra5 102. Rf7+ Kg5 103. Rg7+ Kh6 104.
>Rb7 1-0
>
>Xinix had been rewritten to a new programminglanguage for this tournament,
>but was still having some problems. Never the less it was going to be a
>very long and tiring (for the operators) fight. Neurosis had a won position
>but could only slowly make progress in the endgame. Unfortunatly near the
>end with my opponent just two minutes left on the clock desided Neurosis
>wasn't playing on position (with as argument long time no pawnmoves, but
>white can not just whack the e pawn forward here.) but on clock
>(?! Computers/Neurosis can't do that.) and he called for the referee. Luckily I
>had e5 in my PV for next move (when Neurosis had manouvred itself so that
>finally became possible) and this argument had become invalid. So that was
>an unfortunate end.

Sorry Stan, i don't get that exactly.
Why an unfortunate end? You won!

>
>Day 2, game 4, Ant.
<snip>
>[Event "24th DOCC"]
>[Date "2004.10.17"]
>[Round "05"]
>[White "Kallisto II"]
>[Black "Neurosis"]
>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>
>1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Nf3 Nbd7 7. Qc2 Nb6 8.
>c5 Nbd7 9. Bd3 h6 10. Bf4 Nh5 11. Be5 Kh8 12. Nb5 Nxe5 13. dxe5 c6 14. Nd6
>f5 15. exf6 Nxf6 16. Ne5 Kg8 17. Ng6 Bxd6 18. cxd6 Qa5+ 19. Qd2 Qxd2+ 20.
>Kxd2 Rd8 21. Ne5 Rxd6 22. Bg6 b6 23. Rhd1 Bb7 24. Nf7 Rd7 25. Ne5 Rc7 26.
>f4 c5 27. g3 a5 28. Rac1 a4 29. a3 Ne8 30. Bxe8 Rxe8 31. Kc3 g5 32. Rg1 Kg7
>33. h4 Kf6 34. Ng4+ Kg7 35. Ne5 Kf6 36. Ng4+ Kg7 1/2-1/2
>
>And here I found a bug. (Bugs only come out at important tournaments at
>important moments, never at testing.)


Yes - my excuse to don't test at all ;-)


>Neurosis at the end did not think it
>was a 3x rep because after 33. h4 Neurosis had stored a possible ep-field
>at h3 in his position-code.

hehe

>This is a bug from the very beginning, and has
>never come out before, at the time when coding it I had never realised I
>shouldn't do that when there's not an actual pawn there to capture en
>passant. What are the odds of that comming forward in such a tournament
>huh. And so it ended in a draw without black realising it, and wanted to
>play something else (black's a pawn up) next time white would rep with the
>knight. But I was not unhappy about the result ofcourse, black could not of
>done anything with his extra pawn anyway, actually white had some threats
>here too.
>
>game 6, Nexus.
>
>[Event "24th DOCC"]
>[Date "2004.10.17"]
>[Round "06"]
>[White "Neurosis"]
>[Black "Nexus"]
>[Result "0-1"]
>
>1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qb3 c5 5. Bg5 Nc6 6. dxc5 h6 7. Bd2 O-O 8.
>O-O-O Bxc5 9. e3 b6 10. Nf3 Bb7 11. Bd3 Rc8 12. Na4 Be7 13. Rhf1 Qc7 14. h4
>d5 15. Kb1 Na5 16. Bxa5 dxc4 17. Qb5 cxd3 18. Bc3 Rfd8 19. Rc1 Bc6 20. Qa6
>Ne4 21. Rfd1 Qd7 22. Ne5 Bb5 23. Nxd7 Bxa6 24. Ne5 Nxf2 25. Be1 Nxd1 26.
>Rxd1 d2 27. Rxd2 Rxd2 28. Bxd2 Bf6 0-1
>
>That was the worst game of my program of the tournament. :( I think I was
>outsearched by Nexus by atleast 4 ply everywhere.  12. Na4 is horrible.
>

I had the same feeling against Nexus ;-(


<snip>
>All in all I wasn't so lucky to get a draw against any of the top-programs,
>but it was a nice tournament anyway. Neurosis is a young program anyway and
>I've lots and lots of ideas so there's some hope for the future.
>
>What else, hmm ohyeah, some other spectacles were to be seen.
>For instance Pro deo's operator Hans van der Zijden had thought he was
>going to be bored during the games, and has brought rubix-cubes of various
>sizes to pass time. It was impressive to see he could solve a normal size
>cube in under a minute blindfolded. (first looking and remembering where the
>colours are ofcourse.)
>Then it's fun to see Jeroen Noomen battling it out in quick blitz games
>against the strong programs, and having more then his fair share of draws
>and wins. So people saying computers are stronger then people are wrong, the
>people just need to know how the computers play.
>
>Hope more people will join the Leiden tournaments next time. Thanks to CSVN
>and everyone else.

Well said.

Cheers,
Gerd

>
>Stan



This page took 0.11 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.