Author: Sarah Bird
Date: 21:45:12 07/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 04, 1999 at 21:45:54, James T. Walker wrote: >On July 04, 1999 at 12:32:36, Sarah Bird wrote: > >>On July 04, 1999 at 12:20:33, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On July 01, 1999 at 17:23:03, KarinsDad wrote: >>> >>>>On July 01, 1999 at 16:50:59, odell hall wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>On July 01, 1999 at 15:21:02, James Robertson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 01, 1999 at 13:43:04, odell hall wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>This is a weird newgroup, !! The Biggest event in computer chess history just >>>>>>>took place, yet everyone is silent!! Wake up people! Promgrammers should be >>>>>>>celebrating at their achievement. I am not even a programmer but I am excited. >>>>>> >>>>>>G/25. And there is no World Championship at G/25. And we cannot deduce how Fritz >>>>>>would fare against Kasparov, Anand, or Kramnik; they are all 50-150 points >>>>>>higher than the masters. And not a SINGLE world championship finalist is playing >>>>>>in the masters division! >>>>>> >>>>>>James >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ok james I hear what you are saying! But you have to admit this is quite a >>>>>sensational result for fritz, something that cannot be ingored, when >>>>>consideredring the strength of programs at this time control. >>>> >>>>The following is what Fritz is playing on. Since Siemens is sponsering the >>>>event, you can bet that it is the top end of this and not the bottom end. If so, >>>>8 processors will make this tougher than the Fritz that played at Paderborn >>>>(which I believe was on 4 processors). If you take that into account, it is >>>>probably equilvalent to running Fritz on a single processor system at about G150 >>>>instead of G25. Effectively, the increases in speed due to the multi-processor >>>>systems give the programs more "time" to search, and so they are effectively >>>>playing at slower tournament times (relative to those same programs on single >>>>processor systems). No wonder Fritz is dropping the GMs. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>System board >>>>Microprocessor Intel Pentium II Xeon >>>>PRIMERGY 870-40 max. 4 processors, >>>>PRIMERGY 870-80 max. 8 processors (from end of 98) >>>>Data width 64-bit internal and external >>>>Clock rate cache-bus/host bus 400/100, 450/100 MHz >>>>Second-level cache integrated 512 Kbyte, 1 Mbyte or >>>>2 Mbyte (ab 450 MHz) with ECC >>>>RAM with EDC 128 Mbyte to max. 8 Gbyte >>>>Flash-EPROM BIOS update with FD or LAN possible >>>> >>><snip> >>>>KarinsDad :) >>> >>>Hello KarinsDad, >>>The number of processores Fritz is playing on is pure speculation. It was more >>>than a year ago that Fritz played on a dual processor system but the number of >>>processors it's using this year seems to be a big secret. I have asked around >>>but so far no answers. Also, it looks like Fritz may have a bug in the >>>multiprocessor operation. The move vs Topalov 63. a7 was a definite blunder. >>>It turned a victory into a draw. Since 63 Re8 saves the win and my Fritz 5.32 >>>plays it instantly and never lets go I must assume it's either a bug in Fritz 6 >>>parallel code or some of the new "Knowledge" they gave it is faulty. So, in my >>>opinion the parallel version of Fritz6 is still in developement stages and not >>>ready. In spite of this it's performance is impressive. >>>Jim Walker >> >>Very nice Jim, first i have heard of this position. This is a very major >>bblunder, i bet Topolov couldn't believe his luck. After less than a minute my >>5.32 sees a7 as a draw and both Re8 and Rd8 as clear wins. >>Sarah. > >Hello Sarah, >I can't take credit for this. Bob Hyatt and I was discussing where the error >was since the score went from +3 to 0. He suggested a7 and a little analysis >shows 63. a7 is a blunder. It's interesting to note that after 63. Re8 Re4 64. >RxR KxR 65. a7 e1=Q 66. a8=Q almost all forced, if you remove the two white >kingside pawns the tablebase instantly calls a "mt in 28". This is all from >memory so may be an error in there somewhere. But it looks like it's impossible >to lose this position after 63. Re8. I suspect Topalov was on the verge of >resigning in a couple more moves. So I'm sure he was happy with his good >fortune. >Jim Walker What I found instantly striking is that for a human the immediate reaction is to play Re8 it just seems so natural and obvious. I think to a human the instant evaluation of rooks on or off is natural the old theory of once ahead just go for equal exchanges, naturally it don't always work but clearly here was an obvious and simple win. 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.