Author: Alex Shalamanov
Date: 05:36:57 09/13/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 13, 2005 at 07:27:18, J.Dufek wrote: >On September 13, 2005 at 04:27:13, Alex Shalamanov wrote: > >>On September 13, 2005 at 01:52:05, J.Dufek wrote: >> >> >>>Bad impression. Lot of my analysis i made with Fritz, because my opponents play >>>with him. But results are very very bad. It's only about own experience - you >>>have maybe very good results with Fritz, because he understand yours positions, >>>but for my work (pls look at iccf.com for my rating) is uselles. 3 months ago i >>>analyzed one my corr. position - he offer for opponent 3 or 4 moves (totaly >>>different) with evalution 0,00. This is not only one position... >> >>If you mean Fritz 8X3D, I would agree that it's not strong enough because it was >>the earliest version, but I prefer analyzing with Fritz 1.2.0 (Bilbao) or Deep >>Fritz 8. They are more sophisticated than the predecessor. Of course, the style >>I use (developing complicated acute positions) may count too, but on the whole >>I'm quite happy with DF8. As a proof I can present a position arisen in ICCF >>WS/M/003. What we'are having now, is a complicated endgame. >>The game is still going on but I'm sure it's dead won, so I'm giving it now. >>[D] 7k/3r4/2rN1p1p/2P4P/1P1p4/P2bpKR1/6P1/2R5 w - - 0 56 >> >>I've analyzed this endgame with different engines (Shredder 9 UCI, Fruit 2.1, >>Hiarcs 9, Fritz 8 Bilbao, Deep Fritz 8) but it's only DF8 that produced the >>correct easy winning move sequence: 56.Rg4 Rdxd6 (56...Rcxd6 changes nothing >>much) 57.cxd6 Rxd6 58.Rc8+ Kh7 59.Rc7+ Kh8 60.Rgg7! +- >>I don't know, if the hardware counts here (Celeron 333/128MB RAM) and with the >>better hardware other chess engines would also find the sequence, but with what >>I have this engine seems to work best of all. The other engines proposed 60.a4?! >>as the best move. >> >>Kind regards, >>Alex > >maybe i am wrong, but: >- it's no good provide this on only one positions (it's no problem present >another position with reverse result, and i have it) >- with only quick test, i setup this positions with Gandalf6 + ChessTiger 2004, >he immediately found 1.Rg4 as best move, Shredder 9 CB found this too, but after >56sec preffered 1.Rd1 and then with time 2:00 found back 1.Vg4 (no problem, >+3.40 score >- corr. games are not about finding one move in position, because you need found > less or more long variation... i don't know previous moves in your game, but >you must have this position maybe 10 moves earlier on chessboard.... I didn't have this position analyzed because I didn't suppose my opponent to choose such a weak line. I've just scanned it through without scrutinizing much. When he chose this one I had to analyze it in more detail. And you've missed my point. With my rather outdated hardware only DF8 gives the exact evaluation and the move sequence in a giffy, the others need more time. It means it's good not only in sharp positions. As I take it, it's not a matter of speedsearch but rather of the embedded chess knowledge. Since Fritz9 is said to have even more chess knowledge, I will purchase it most evidently.
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.