Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:40:28 08/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 18, 2005 at 09:48:19, Peter Berger wrote: >On August 18, 2005 at 09:01:51, Majd Al-Ansari wrote: > >>I was watching the game on playchess and looks like Fruit won the game. Very >>impressive game considering Crafty was using 8 processors and Fruit only 1 >>processor. But I have to admit I think that Crafty was caught by poor book >>opening. > >I am not sure I completely agree with this assessment, at least not when put >this way. > >The potentially controversial move is 11. ... g5 I suppose. I don't think this >move is that bad at all, objectively. Let's move a little further: 12. Qd2 h6 >13. Qc3 Qf6 14. Kh1 . Here Crafty played 14. ...Bb7?, that is clearly a bad >idea. The king has to stay in the centre or castle queenside if necessary, the >bishop belongs to d7 or e6 and then the rooks both belong to the kingside to >attack white's king. > >After 14. ...Bb7 white has an edge, but black is not lost. After 15. f4 gxf4 16. >Bxf4 the next critical point is reached. Here a possible move is 16...Rg8 e.g. - >nothing to brag about, but black is still well alive. Instead 16. ..O-O ?? is >just suicide. > >So yes - this line should never have been in Crafty's book, because it could not >deal with it. I am to blame for that, so maybe 0.6 points were lost because of >that - bad enough !! The rest is Crafty's fault, that just castled into it. > >Congrats to Fruit - nice game! > >Peter I think the criticism for the g5 move came from two different GM players, one on ICC (Goldmund) and another that wanted to remain nameless. However, as far as the O-O goes, it might well be forced from a material point of view. I am having crafty annotate this one move in the game, and asked it to give me the 10 best moves. I'll post the alternatives. Here is a point to ponder, as to whether this loss was your fault or not: You walk into a room and the door slams behind you as someone locks you in. You now discover the room is air-tight. You die. Was it your fault? Yes, because you managed to breathe all the air and then suffocate. :) In opening books, it is _very_ difficult to predict everything the opponent would do. You were probably watching Crafty's output, and I noticed that in the normal "find the best non-book-move to ponder" algorithm, that the score was already +1.3 where Crafty was instantly predicting the Qd2/Qc3 idea. The only way to avoid choosing a bad book line from time to time, is to simply avoid choosing any book lines at all, and not play the games. :) If I had a buck for every bad book line I had personally caused to be played in ACM and WCCC events over the years, I could buy a meal for two at the best restaurant you could find. And the counter-point, don't forget. Deep Junior. Shredder. Diep. Three good book outcomes. The Sjeng opening was not as good, but Crafty managed to equalize and then simply misplay the resulting ending badly due to a problem _I_ had introduced way back in the 19.x series. Still 5 rounds to go. Let's see what happens. It's played just fine. For those that think Fruit is better with this particular hardware being used, let 'em dream. :) Uri included. Perhaps I can get him to come to ICC and play a group of games one evening this week. I _know_ how that turns out, as I have already played a bunch of 2.1 games recently as a guest for testing. Of course I have a big hardware advantage. Never said otherwise... To think that it doesn't mean anything shows a lack of understanding of tree searching... 6 rounds played, 4 blacks. Time for some whites now, I hope? :) Particularly white against strong opponents. :)
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.