Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Most brilliant novelty from cct7 Witchess-Arasan

Author: Arturo Ochoa

Date: 05:49:45 02/16/05

Go up one level in this thread


On February 16, 2005 at 06:52:42, Vasik Rajlich wrote:

>On February 15, 2005 at 14:07:29, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>
>>On February 15, 2005 at 09:39:08, Vasik Rajlich wrote:
>>
>>>On February 15, 2005 at 06:53:43, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 15, 2005 at 05:34:37, Vasik Rajlich wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On February 14, 2005 at 19:54:03, Peter Berger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On February 14, 2005 at 19:38:12, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Not really. It is  presmise already debated previously. It doesnt provide a new
>>>>>>>light about the thopic. Sorry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>OK, one more (and no, I never claimed to have any special skills and ideas in
>>>>>>this area at all, that was you and Vincent :) ).  One of the poor programs
>>>>>>provided with a book by me and playing with the black pieces will be out of book
>>>>>>after 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. cxd5 as happened for Crafty against Diep last year ,
>>>>>>if I hadn't thought of this possibilty before - isn't that just awful ? I don't
>>>>>>think so, it's just logical. Control has become a major point IMHO , the engines
>>>>>>don't do too bad on their own. Of course it is better if you thought of some
>>>>>>potentially relevant line like this, but better nothing than random grandmaster
>>>>>>lines. Yes, you opposed this point of view multiple times before in discussions
>>>>>>with Uri , but I think you never managed to score. I'd accept a challenge btw -
>>>>>>over a good bottle of wine, champaigne, or so.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, this is an interesting point. A lot of "theory" is almost never played -
>>>>>everybody knows the refutations, so there are no games. A thorough book author
>>>>>will include these known refutations in his book.
>>>>>
>>>>>Your not being ready for 3. cxd5 goes in this category, since the move is a
>>>>>blunder. The problem with 3. cxd5 immediately is that after 3. .. exd5 4. Nc3
>>>>>c6! black will take control of the b1-h7 diagonal with either 5. .. Bf5 or, if
>>>>>white tries 5. Qc2, 5. .. Ne7 followed by 6. .. Bf5. When white correctly delays
>>>>>cxd5, he will get this diagonal himself.
>>>>>
>>>>>For what it's worth, neither the Junior nor the Shredder book has this piece of
>>>>>knowledge.
>>>>>
>>>>>Vas
>>>>
>>>>Of course, Shedder has played in Tournaments more side lines than this. For
>>>>example: 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Bd3 against the French.
>>>>
>>>>3. cxd is not  a blunder because it doesnt mean a direct lost. It is just a
>>>>passive move.
>>>>
>>>>Correction:
>>>>
>>>>1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. cxd exd 4. Nf3 if .... c6.
>>>>
>>>>5. Bf4.....
>>>>
>>>>your options..... 5. .... Bf5 6. e3... The position is =
>>>>
>>>>5. ... Ne7 6.  Nf3 =
>>>>
>>>>The problem is not the move is a mistake. It is just  a passive move. Thatīs
>>>>all.
>>>>
>>>>Arturo.
>>>
>>>Actually on 4. Nf3 black can play 4. .. Bd6, since .. Bf5 still can't be
>>>stopped.
>>>
>>>Of course white is ok - white is always ok. This situation just shows one of the
>>>problems with automatically generated books. 3. cxd5 is a line that must be done
>>>manually, game statistics won't help.
>>>
>>>In fact, when I first saw this game, I thought that maybe this was one of
>>>Vincent's little jokes ...
>>>
>>>Vas
>>
>>It is just a joke what you have written before. The joke is to think the move is
>>a blunder. If you say that how I can explain you.
>>
>>It would interesting what you think a blunder is. Are you clear with that
>>concept?
>>
>>Besides, givin a simple move doesnt prove anything. Can you point out a better
>>proof that those moves are a direct blunder?
>>
>>I am sure that your next  reply will funnier. Continue. I can read some jokes
>>here. :))))
>>
>>Arturo.
>
>Hmmm.
>
>A blunder is a move that costs you 700 rating points :)
>
>Vas


Not exactly: Go to the following links and you will understand what a blunder
is.

http://chess.about.com/cs/reference/g/bldefblu.htm

http://www.worldchessnetwork.com/English/chessNews/articles/blunders-1.php

And this especial "kind of blunder": the last blunder
http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess2/resigntxt.htm

Perhaps, you will understand what a blunder means. :)

Arturo.
















This page took 0.01 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.