Author: Harald Faber
Date: 01:28:18 09/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 01, 1999 at 16:53:02, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>>>Against Nimzo it was 2.02 or 2.03, the updates went very quick, against Hiarcs
>>>it is 2.50.
>
>i will comment to the nimzo games later...
I am curious how you argue for these games. :-)
>>>Let me guess: 2.50 is BUGGY and you have a better style for 2.02/2.03 (like you
>>>always have/had) which would play better... :-)
>
>
>first: 2.5 IS buggy.
Ah! I knew it! :-)
CSTal versions were ALWAYS buggy, especially when someone presents CSTal-losses.
:-)
>so you tested a buggy version against hiarcs !!
>second: you are not allowed to use it !
>this version is (see licence agreement) especially for programmers !
AFAIK YOU wrote it has the 2.02 or 2.03 implemented.
>it is a DEMO version !!
OK, then I'll play the 2.03 again. Do you recommend to use YOUR settings or the
original ones just to make clear I use the BEST settings recommended by YOU.
>To the hiarcs games:
No need to argue Thorsten, I also KNEW BEFORE that you will find at least 5
moves you can't reproduce. You ALWAYS did. No matter which version one took.
>[Event "Chessnet"]
>[Site "Chessnet"]
>[Date "1999.??.??"]
>[Round "?"]
>[White "Hiarcs7.32"]
>[Black "CStal2"]
>[Result "*"]
>[ECO "A01"]
>[PlyCount "74"]
>
>1. b3 e5 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 d5 4. Bb5 Bd6 5. Nf3 f6 6. c4 a6 7. cxd5 axb5 8. dxc6
>bxc6 9. Qc2 Ne7 10. Nc3 O-O 11. O-O Qe8 12. a4 Bg4 {cannot reproduce Bg4, my
>program wants to play Nd5 out of book, opening-book setting on STRENGTH,
>how was your setting? Bg4 throws my version out of its own book-line !! strange}
>13. axb5 cxb5 14. Rxa8 Qxa8 15. Ne4 Bb4 16. Rc1 Rd8 17. Nh4 c5 18. Bc3 Qd5 19.
>Bxb4 cxb4
>20. Qc5 Qxc5 21. Rxc5 Be2 22. Rc7 Kf8 23. Rb7 Rc8 24. f4 exf4 25. exf4 Bd3 26.
>Ng3 Rc1+
>27. Kf2 Rb1 28. Nh5 Be4 29. Rd7 Rxb3 30. Nxg7 Rd3 31. Ne6+ Kf7 32. Rxd3 Bxd3 33.
>Nc5
>Bc2 34. Ke2 b3 35. Nd3 Nd5 36. g3 Ke6 37. Nf3 37... Nb4 {you stop the game at
>this
>position and wonder if cstal would win or even draw this game. this is
>unbelievable
>since cstal is in a better position. it only shows that you want to show what
>you
>have prejudices in beforehand.} *
I will keep you informed. The game is in progress.
>I would say the game is or would be a draw. I see no reason why cstal should
>lose it. maybe - depending on hiarcs - cstal could win. but this is difficult
>to say...
I know and I am waiting/playing for the result.
>but adjudicating HERE looks not very objective.
Of course not. It was MY PERSONAL impression based on the games I have seen. I
stated it very clear.
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.