Author: Uri Blass
Date: 11:15:47 02/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2005 at 14:09:53, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>On February 15, 2005 at 12:51:06, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On February 15, 2005 at 12:39:58, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On February 15, 2005 at 12:06:24, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 15, 2005 at 11:25:32, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On February 14, 2005 at 18:47:22, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On February 14, 2005 at 16:51:47, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On February 14, 2005 at 15:57:16, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>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.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Movei is weak relative to the top programs also when both programs use the same
>>>>>>>external book so I do not see how the results of Movei prove something about the
>>>>>>>importance of book.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Of course, the results doesnt prove anything because your book was a random
>>>>>>thing combined with the Movei blunders caused what you know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You may be able to tune your book against movei's public book but if I come
>>>>>>>to the tournament with new book you will not be able to plan openings that
>>>>>>>moveidoes not understand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I did not tune the book against Movei.... I tune a book for a specific engine.
>>>>>>Anthony accepted my help and I did my best in 2 short months. Of course, how
>>>>>>could you understand that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Note that in the last tournament I used Dan Corbit's book in rounds 1-6 and got
>>>>>>>4.5 out of 6, but after movei got out of book against averno
>>>>>>>with 1.d4 Nf6 c4 e5 and got negative evaluation some moves later I decided that
>>>>>>>I do not like Corbit's book and replaced the book by the public book(still small
>>>>>>>book but at least movei is not out of book after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You continue missing what I have repeated you over the last 3 years. They are
>>>>>>random books. They are not tuned hy hand. Anything can happen. Again, how could
>>>>>>I explain you that? Three years in this forum and you repeat the same
>>>>>>_cantaleta_ :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Maybe it was a mistake because Movei lost the last 3 games but I do not think
>>>>>>>that part of the opponents tuned against Movei's public book(after all they
>>>>>>>cannot know that I will use it and I do not think that it is so important for
>>>>>>>them to win to waste many hours not only against movei's book but also against
>>>>>>>book of other programs because movei has no special importance)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Movei lost by itself. No for any tuned book against Movei. Zappa outsearched
>>>>>>Movei in tha game and played a better game. Movei made all kind of mistakes in
>>>>>>that game. It was not any book just the Movei game.
>>>>>
>>>>>Exactly, i saw Uri however blame the hardware of the opponent, who by the way
>>>>>has lower clocked processors than Movei uses.
>>>>>
>>>>>Vincent
>>>>
>>>>hardware was one of the advantage of zappa in the meaning that
>>>>zappa on movei's hardware is weaker.
>>>>
>>>>zappa is simply better than movei but I think that in the future I will never
>>>>use the public book in these events.
>>>>
>>>>It is probably only bad luck but after replacing Dan Corbit's book by movei's
>>>>public book before the game against zappa movei lost every game.
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>So you complain about book meanwhile saying book is not important?
>>
>>I will not use the public book only to prevent the possibility of preperation
>>against it.
>>
>>It does not mean that I plan to spend a lot of time of building a better book
>>for movei.
>>
>>Uri
>
>Of course, dont spend that time. It will be new easy points for your opponents.
>
>Arturo..
Of course if I do not improve the engine it will be new easy points for the
opponents.
Uri
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.