Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:39:48 06/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 23, 2005 at 03:37:51, Robin Smith wrote: >On June 22, 2005 at 16:20:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 22, 2005 at 13:51:40, Robin Smith wrote: >> >>>On June 22, 2005 at 03:10:00, Drexel,Michael wrote: >>> >>>>On June 21, 2005 at 23:00:37, Robin Smith wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 18:36:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 16:44:21, Torstein Hall wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 15:30:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 14:19:44, Robin Smith wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 14:11:23, Mark Young wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On June 21, 2005 at 14:04:37, Ted Summers wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>To sum it up " He played a drawish opening in a tactic way. " Not a good idea >>>>>>>>>>>when computers are able to hang with the best and proving themself as better >>>>>>>>>>>than humans in open tactical positions. However I still think GM Adams can pull >>>>>>>>>>>it together and Win or Draw this match. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>[D] r2q1rk1/1pp3pp/p2b4/nP1p1p1b/2PPn3/3B1N1P/P1QN1PP1/1RB1R1K1 b - - 0 17 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Having reached this position, we seemed to be watching the beginning of the end >>>>>>>>>>>for Adams in the first game but hopefully not the match. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>C4! was a killer positional shot. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>c4 was a good move, but hardly a "killer". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>It seems clear GM Adams missed this move when he played Na5. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Perhaps Adams miissed it, but it hardly seems "clear", since Black is still OK >>>>>>>>>afterwards. His loss happened later. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>-Robin >>>>>>>>The problem here is that the kingside is already a bit open. One does _not_, as >>>>>>>>a human, allow the computer to open _both_ sides of the board in the same game. >>>>>>>>It invites a debacle such as this. Of course, he made a couple of tactical >>>>>>>>errors around the point where the rook on C8 was hanging, but he was already in >>>>>>>>the wrong kind of position... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>All the comps were suggesting the same moves as played by Hydra, so there was no >>>>>>>>real surprises from the white side, just black making an error here, an error >>>>>>>>there, before long he fell off the rim of the canyon. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>This is in my view far to general. Black was at least = uptil move 23.Be6 >>>>>>>[D]2rq1r1k/6pp/p2bB3/2p1Np1b/3Pn3/7P/P1Q2PP1/1RB1R1K1 b - - 0 23 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Define "equal". Here I am considering the important detail that white is a >>>>>>computer, black is a human. In that regard, black is _not_ equal up to move 23. >>>>> >>>>>By that logic Adams was already much worse after 1.e4 no matter what he did. >>>>>Let's face it, Hydra is stronger. Adams will probably be under presure in every >>>>>game where he has the black pieces. >>>>> >>>>>> In fact, I don't believe black is anywhere near equal. >>>>> >>>>>He is equal unless you use your "considering the important detail that white is >>>>>a computer" logic. >>>>> >>>>>>He isn't lost, but he is far from equal and is at best fighting for a draw. >>>>> >>>>>>But in an open position. >>>>>>And he just has no chance in that kind of position. >>>>> >>>>>He was under presure, yes. That is a far cry from "has no chance". >>>>> >>>>>>But I would take white anywhere along the way in that game, as a human playing >>>>>>another human. And by the way, any move after the "knight to the rim" move >>>>>>finds white better IMHO. >>>>> >>>>>Your opinion is wrong, unless perhaps you mean that white had a very slight >>>>>advantage. That is the norm in chess, by the way. >>>>> >>>>>>>Adams played 23...Rc7 while 23...cxd4 looks like it holds everything nicely >>>>>>>together. >>>>>> >>>>>>Doesn't quite hold everything nicely together. The comps were at about +1 here >>>>>>already, went to +1.5 on the Rc7 move. >>>>> >>>>>Maybe Craqfty sees +1, but the top programs don't see anything near +1 until >>>>>_after_ Rc7. Before Rc7 black was fine. >>>> >>>>You don´t have a clue. >>> >>>And you do? :-) >>> >>>>It´s always easy to sacrifice the exchange of others. In order to play this >>>>sacrifice you have to calculate correctly some very concrete lines. >>> >>>Of course. That is obvious and I never said otherwise. All I said was that black >>>is OK if he plays cxd4 instead of Rc7. >>> >>>>For example 24.Bxc8 Bxe5 ( The ending after 24...Qxc8 is very difficult to play >>>>for black) 25.Bxf5 d3 24.Qc6 d2 27.Bxd2 Nxd2 28.Rxe5 Nxb1 29.Bxb1 Qd1+ 30.Kh2 >>>>Qxb1 31.Qd6 Kg8 32.Rxh5 Qxa2 = and the position after 25.Qxc8 Qf6 26.Qc4 Qxe5 >>>>27.g3 is very difficult to play for black. >>>> >>>>Definitely not the typ of position you want to play against a computer. >>> >>>I agreed this is not the type of position a human wants to be in in another >>>post. Did you read it before you shot off your mouth? >>> >>>>Therefore Adams Rc7 is a completely understandable decision. >>> >>>I agree that Adams decision was understandable. I never said otherwise. It was >>>also a mistake, that's all; an understandable mistake. I have always agreed that >>>by this point Adams was in the type of position that is hard for a human to >>>play. That does not mean he made mistakes earlier. It is easier for white to >>>create open, messy positions that are hard for a human to play than it is for >>>black to prevent it, so just because it happens does not mean Adams made >>>mistakes prior to getting into such a position. Hyrda won because Hydra played >>>well, not because Adams "blundered" or made "outright stupid" choices or "GM >>>Adams missed this move". I think it is disrespectful to GM Adams when people say >>>such things, especially since Adams _didn't_ blunder. >>> >>>-Robin >> >> >>I'll say it again. You can throw high, fast and outside to a big hitter, and >>when he slaps it over the fence, you can say "good shot". Or you can say "lousy >>pitch." In this game, it was a lousy pitch by Adams. If he chooses to avoid >>anti-computer type chess, that's fine, and no it isn't a blunder. > >Then why in http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?432636 did you say >"He was guilty of a different type of blunder. Namely of playing 1. ... e5 >against the computer." Was it a blunder or not? Have you changed your position >so that now we agree? > >-Robin No. It was a mistake, or a blunder, or a foolhardy opening choice. You pick the description. But it was clearly the wrong approach to playing a computer. Anyone that has played them often will say the same thing... I don't see why this turns into an argument when the basic premise is so well understood by so many... > >>But it _is_ a >>mistake. You play to your opponent's weaknesses, not to his strength, for max >>advantage. >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>>>Michael >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>But then the next few moves were mostly >>>>>>bad by black, turning this into a debacle. But if there were not so many open >>>>>>files, open diagonals, etc, black wouldn't have had to be worrying about tactics >>>>>>all over the board. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> One line could be 23...cxd4 24.Qxc8 Qf6 25.Qc4 Qxe5 26.Qa5 and black >>>>>>>looks OK to me. >>>>>> >>>>>>But white looks better to me there. Maybe not "winning better" but >>>>>>"significantly better". >>>>> >>>>>Try "very slightly better". Adams played well until Rc7. Hydra is very strong >>>>>and kept putting the presure on and finally Adams made a mistake. >>>>> >>>>>-Robin
This page took 0.01 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.