Author: Melvin S. Schwartz
Date: 13:14:57 07/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 03, 1999 at 03:03:54, Sarah Bird wrote: >On July 03, 1999 at 01:11:53, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >> >>On July 02, 1999 at 23:18:13, Terry Ripple wrote: >> >>>On July 02, 1999 at 19:38:58, Sarah Bird wrote: >>> >>>>On July 02, 1999 at 18:37:35, Steve Lopez wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 02, 1999 at 18:23:41, Steve Lopez wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 02, 1999 at 18:03:08, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>This is the Sicilian that Hiarcs 7.32 plays on my program. I re-installed the >>>>>>>program and it still plays this line that both of you say is not possible. I >>>>>>>suggest you open the tree, make the board small so you see the info, and check >>>>>>>it out! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>White: Schwartz >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Black: Hiarcs 7.32 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>1.e4...c5 2.Nf3...e6 3.d4...cxd4 4.Nxd4...Nf6 5.Nc3...Nc6 6.Nxc6...bxc6 >>>>>>>7.e5...Nd5 8.Ne4...f5 (here Hiarcs first choice is Qc7 which it should play; >>>>>>>however, f5 is listed as the other choice here. IMHO f5 should not be played at >>>>>>>all). 9.Nd6+ >>>>>>>...Bxd6 (and here the info screen says Bxd6 no highlighted in red) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>My apologies to all. If you *manually* make the move 9.Nxd6+ (a non-book move), >>>>>it *transposes* into another book line. Following that line of play out to the >>>>>end of book (14...0-0), we get to a position that's come up twice in my master >>>>>database: Byrne-Day, Buenos Aires ol, 1978 (1-0) and Sandor-Szelenyi, >>>>>Balatonalm, 1996 (0-1). >>>>> >>>>>I'll leave it to stronger players than myself to debate the relative merits of >>>>>this position, but various chess engines I've examined this with give the >>>>>position as equal or as a slight edge to White. >>>>> >>>>>Crow -- ummmm-ummmmm! Good eatin'! >>>>> >>>>>-- Steve Lopez >>>> >>>>I believe the point of the thread from the start is hiarcs poor opening book. >>>>Two positions were posted both with errors once figured out seems to me that >>>>both of the positions are playable. In this case the Sicilian after 10 exd6 >>>>seems to be reasonably playable to me. >>>>Sarah. >>>----------- >>>I played out the line as i posted above and i don`t see a problem and so i >>>second the motion Sarah >> >>The question of it being playable is interesting. Yes, it is playable; however, >>f5 was not the best move - Qc7 was the best move. All you have to do is look at >>the tree and see the weights assigned to f5 and Qc7. The difference is something >>like 80% to 18%. We are talking here about tournament book and tournament level >>and what is the best move. If you think f5 is better than Qc7, then you disagree >>with your program and me. >> >>By the way, do you have a rating? I know you analyze positions a lot, but do you >>play 40/2 against your program? Or 40/60? Do you play against your software >>programs? >> >> >>Regards, >>Mel > >Lets try to sort this out once and for all: > >1.e4.....c5 >2.Nf3....e6 >3.d4.....cxd4 >4.Nxd4...Nf6 >5.Nc3....Nc6 >6.Nxc6...bxc6 >7.e5.....Nd5 >8.Ne4....f5 >These are the moves in question as a starting point. You complain about hiarcs >book using the line using 8.......f5. You have white. >If you use the book at it's best settings the move f5 would never be played. ************************************************* I have tournament book ON. I have the book setting set at optimize (default). I have not added anything to the tree. I have copied the tree via "copy tree to disc". You say Hiarcs wouldn't play f5 at its best setting - that is simply not true. All you have to do is open the tree and click on Hiarcs moves in response to mine and you should see f5 with a weight of about 18%. It's that simple. Read all the way down as I have replied to your other statements. **************************************************** >That is to say tournament book on variety of play to minimum. Remember variety >is set higher so that you have more variation with the ******************************************* I have it at the default setting which is the same as optimize. Nothing has been changed. ************************************************* book. Mine I just realize >may not play it due to book adjustments (learning) however I have tried to get >mine to follow this line a 100 times and it won't. > >To attempt to carry on a little further. >9. Nd6...Bxd6 >10.exd...Now it gets strange since 10...Qb6 is still book. >Yet if I buy into what you are telling me Hiarcs here I must assume played 0-0. >11.Be2...Qb6 >12.c4....Nf6 >13.0-0. And that this is the final position you complain is so bad for black. > >So what do we have mistaken moves posted, complaint about ******************************************** Not important...hmmm. You don't mind seeing someone posting mistaken moves? ************************************************* book but not used to >it's optimum playing strength, with 10....?? I must assume another mistaken >posted move, then finally last but by no means least a *************************************************** I sense you like to deal in assumptions. I didn't post all the moves of the game for it wasn't necessary. You must assume another mistaken move - why? ********************************************** final position that >leaves white less then 0.5 of a pawn up. As for the complaint about the bishop's >opening again I would suggest you change your book settings however that was >also dealt with in another thread. **************************************** You are quoting from someone else who was wrong! Why don't you ask me specifically what it is you think I have done wrong? Too much trouble for you? I have nothing set wrong. The only thing I find wrong is people making assumptions on hearsay rather than fact. Mel *************************************** > >To deal with your specific questions I was rated at 2140 a couple of years ago, **************************************************** I don't recall asking your rating. However, I will tell you this about me, Garry Kasparov has repeatedly refused to accept my challenge - why? Fear, that's why. :-) Mel ************************************** >prior to other committments. I do play against my programs but it would be true >to state that I handicap them normally either by turning down there rating then >playing an even timed game or by allowing the program less time than I normally >10 minutes for it and 2 hours for me. I normally do not play any program until I >have seen it play a considerable amount of games at which point I feel I have >more of an idea of it's style. I use computers as an analysis tool and to play >over games played by others. >Thanks. >Sarah.
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.