Author: Arturo Ochoa
Date: 12:57:16 02/14/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 14, 2005 at 11:40:12, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 14, 2005 at 10:56:24, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On February 14, 2005 at 10:33:12, Jon Dart wrote: >> >>>A few notes from Arasan's games in CCT7: >>> >>>Game 1 against Homer, Arasan had Black in a QID that Schroer called >>>"a super high-class line, very theoretical". Arasan was in book until >>>move 18. It appears Homer misplayed the next few moves. Arasan's score >>>rapidly climbed and it won. >>> >>>Arasan won easily against Alarm after it blundered here with .. Bxa3: >>> >>>[D] 3q1b1k/1p4pp/rn2rp2/BR2p3/p3N3/P2PP1P1/5P1P/1QR3K1 b - - 0 1 >>> >>>Black is not in good shape already, but the pawn can't be taken. >>> >>>Arasan lost against Fafis. The opening was some unusual variant of the >>>Four Knights .. Arasan was out of book at move 7. Arasan's score >>>was positive until move 45. I haven't analyzed this yet so I am >>>not sure where it went wrong but it lost rapidly after that. >>> >>>This game against nullmover gave me some anxious moments. 7 .. Ne8 >>>is unusual (..c6 is more common) and Arasan was out of book after >>>that. Black got what looked like a pretty scary k-side attack >>>in the KID. But Arasan defended - in fact its score was never >>>negative. Finally Arasan broke through on the q-side -- standard >>>play in the KID - and won. The nullmover author mentioned his program >>>had no passed pawn code and in general has a simple eval. >>> >>>[Event "?"] >>>[Site "chessclub.com"] >>>[Date "2005.02.13"] >>>[Round "?"] >>>[White "Arasan 9.0"] >>>[Black "nullmover"] >>>[Result "1-0"] >>>[ECO "E87"] >>>[WhiteElo "2594"] >>>[BlackElo "2202"] >>>[TimeControl "3000+3"] >>> >>>1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 O-O 6. Be3 e5 7. d5 Ne8 >>>8. Qd2 f5 9. exf5 gxf5 10. Bd3 Na6 11. Nge2 Nb4 12. O-O f4 13. Bf2 >>>Nxd3 14. Qxd3 Rf5 15. Ne4 Rh5 16. b4 Rh6 17. Rfe1 Rg6 18. Kh1 Nf6 >>>19. N2c3 Nxe4 20. Nxe4 Bf5 21. Rg1 Kh8 22. a4 Qe7 23. c5 dxc5 >>>24. bxc5 Rg8 25. d6 Qf7 26. Rad1 Rh6 27. Rge1 cxd6 28. cxd6 b6 >>>29. Qd5 Be6 30. Qd2 Bf8 31. Qc3 Qg7 32. g4 Rh3 33. g5 Bg4 34. Rd3 Bf5 >>>35. a5 Rh5 36. Rd5 Bxe4 37. Rxe5 Qf7 38. R5xe4+ Bg7 39. Qc6 Rxg5 >>>40. Re8 Rg6 41. axb6 axb6 42. Bxb6 Qa2 43. Rxg8+ Kxg8 44. Re8+ >>> 1-0 {nullmover resigns} >>> >>>Against Pharaon, Arasan played a reasonable variant of the Slav and >>>was ok for a long time. Finally at this point Pharaon played Bh6: >>> >>>[D] q6k/3r1p2/p4Pp1/1pRn3p/3PQ3/P6P/1P1B4/6K1 w - - 0 1 >>> >>>and then posted the Bishop on g7. Neither Arasan nor Crafty would play >>>Bh6 at the tournament time level on the hardware I have, but Crafty >>>does eventually fail high on it, with a score of +1.7, so this may >>>have been the decisive move. >>> >>>I wasn't watching for a while, but the next time I looked Pharaon was up >>>a Knight--not quite sure how that happened, but seems like it found a >>>nice tactic. >>> >>>Pharaon was strong even before its recent version update and now it >>>is really formidable. >>> >>>In the Chompster game, 37 .. a4 by Chompster was a bad mistake, >>>gifting Arasan with an outside passer: >>> >>>[D] 2q1r1k1/5pp1/5bp1/p7/4PQ2/1Br5/P4RPP/5R1K b - - 0 1 >>> >>>But the game got into a bishop of opposite colors ending and was >>>drawn. I actually made the draw manually, which brought a protest >>>from sfarrell: he is right that under the rules this should not >>>have been done without the TD's consent. It seems several programs >>>broke this rule in this round. >>> >>>I was disappointed to lose the last game against cEng (witchess). It >>>had a very unusual opening: >>> >>>[Event "?"] >>>[Site "chessclub.com"] >>>[Date "2005.02.13"] >>>[Round "?"] >>>[White "witchess"] >>>[Black "Arasan 9.0"] >>>[Result "1-0"] >>>[ECO "C28"] >>>[WhiteElo "2397"] >>>[BlackElo "2594"] >>>[TimeControl "3000+3"] >>> >>>1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bc4 Nc6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Nxe4 d5 6. Bd3 dxe4 >>>7. Bxe4 Ne7 8. c3 f5 9. Bc2 e4 10. Ne5 Qd5 11. f4 exf3 12. Nxf3 Qe6+ >>>13. Kf2 Qb6+ 14. d4 Be6 15. Ba4+ c6 16. Re1 Bd5 17. Bb3 O-O-O 18. Bg5 >>>Qc7 19. Bxd5 cxd5 20. Qe2 Qb6 21. c4 Rd7 22. cxd5 Kb8 23. Qe5+ Ka8 >>>24. d6 Rxd6 25. Bxe7 Bxe7 26. Qxe7 Rc8 27. Kg1 Rg8 28. Rac1 Rdd8 >>> 1-0 {ArasanX resigns} >>> >>>I analyzed this overnight with Crafty but didn't find where Arasan >>>went wrong. I didn't like 7.. Ne7 and 7.. Bd6 seems to be better - >>>this has occurred in a few games with this line. After Ne7, Arasan >>>had its Bishop locked in and failed to develop it. >> >>I watched this game live and found it a very strong game from witchess. >>Especially because it plays without book. Let's be honest there. That's 700 >>rating points (a real strong book). > >How did you get that estimate? > >Do you have one tournament when a program with no book performed 700 elo worse >than the same program with book? > >Uri Well.... I love that you continue missing the importance of the opening book. It will mean more easy points for your opponents! I have been reading your same "cantaleta" (*) for years and I have seen how Movei has been beated by books well tuned. Hopefully, you understand that in 20 years. Who knows...... Arturo. (*) Cantaleta = a repetitive nonsense made for years without showing any proof on your behalf.
This page took 0.03 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.