Author: Marc-Olivier Moisan-Plante
Date: 00:15:17 10/29/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 29, 2005 at 01:29:32, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 28, 2005 at 22:56:20, Marc-Olivier Moisan-Plante wrote: > >> >>Who would doubt that once in a while programs like to jettison a pawn on move 4 >>for obscure compensation? >> >>[D] rn1qkb1r/ppp1pppp/3p1n2/5b2/2PP4/2N5/PP2PPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4 > >e4 is not a sacrifice. >White can get the pawn back in few moves. > >examples: > >1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 d6 3.Nc3 Bf5 4.e4 Bxe4 5.Nxe4 Nxe4 6.Qf3 d5 7.Qb3 with a fork. > >Note that 6.Qf3 is typical for humans who go for material gain. >I guess that it is the reason that I find only 6.Qf3 in Fritz8.ctg and in >Junior9.ctg and not computer typical move that do not win material like 6.Qb3 or >6.Bd3 > >Uri As you point out, this is *not* a sacrifice. Just a plain bad move which gives away the advantage for white (at least!). So just a bad move. This is different from the examples presented before where "Fritz 9" absolutely (and wrongly) sacrifies a pawn. You get a point here. However in both Fruit 2.2 and Fritz 8 PVs', "4.e4" is a genuine pawn sacrifice... (also Ruffian 1.0.5 "agrees") so they both intend to sac the pawn... for dubious compensation (in my opinion)... hence my post... They look like an over optimistic human here...strange pseudo-sacrifice... Do they look like human? If yes, it is hard to say that "Fritz 9" is more human... or just a weak human?! I think that saying "Fritz 9" is more human is fluke (though this is an uninformed opinion as I don't own it - I guess it is a great chess program in general) and I would guess that Hiarcs 9 (9...9.6...10) is (will be) more human in general. What I wanted to point out is that "sceptical" program like Fruit 2.2 do sometimes evaluate PV's in which there are "strange moves" (which GM would play 4.e4 seriously?), so that anti-Fritz data mining is unfair. PS: Chessbase did positive data mining for their product here: http://www.fritz9.de/experten/fritz9engine.htm . I know you already know that. PPS: I already suggested on this forum (without success!) that fans of program xyz should gather moves found *uniquely* by their favorite program, so the competition would turn around finding "good moves" instead of publishing "mistakes". That sounds more interesting to me... (general comment, not something related to your post). PPSS: With your suggestions (6.Qb3 or 6.Bd3), I still think that white stands worse (are you an ICCF GM?, so you can confirm that?! - almost a free pawn, isn't it?). Cheers, Marc-Olivier
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.