Author: Graham Laight
Date: 05:32:22 02/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 26, 2000 at 20:15:30, Christophe Theron wrote:
>On February 26, 2000 at 16:50:14, Graham Laight wrote:
>
>>On February 25, 2000 at 06:20:17, Graham Laight wrote:
>>
>>>On February 24, 2000 at 19:18:07, Pete Galati wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 24, 2000 at 18:59:48, Graham Laight wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>>I've dropped myself in the soup, but there may still be time to rescue the
>>>>>situation.
>>>>>
>>>>>My friend and I are both about 1600 Elo. I challenged him to play Bringer with
>>>>>the computer a queen down, and the computer having only 5 minutes on the clock
>>>>>(to his 55). He accepted, and the game will take place on Monday.
>>>>>
>>>>>I assumed I had just set myself up for an easy 1 GBP, but I was in for a shock:
>>>>>compared to us, Bringer is a brilliant player - but it has a blind spot for this
>>>>>particular situation. It doesn't realise that when you're down you must
>>>>>
>>>>>* avoid trading material
>>>>>
>>>>>* mix it tactically
>>>>>
>>>>>I have found that, under the stipulated conditions, even I can very easily beat
>>>>>Bringer, because it plays quietly, and easily allows exchanges. My opponent
>>>>>would have to make a relatively obvious blunder to get any trouble from this
>>>>>program.
>>>>>
>>>>>In my quest for more information, I have played 3 other machines under the
>>>>>stipulated conditions.
>>>>>
>>>>>1. The version of Chess Tal ('96) I am using has some interesting ideas, but is
>>>>>ultimately not strong enough for this challenge. Also, it keeps trying to
>>>>>resign!
>>>>>
>>>>>2. Rebel Decade 2 threw its pawns forward and immobilised my position, making it
>>>>>very difficult to play against, even though it remained a queen down! However,
>>>>>it does not run under NT.
>>>>>
>>>>>3. Travel Champion 2100, as ever, created tactical mayhem from a quiet looking
>>>>>position. It made me panic, it made me lose material, and generally made a
>>>>>mockery of me. Another advantage is that if I can persuade my friend to use this
>>>>>machine (my NT portable could develop an untimely "fault"), the pieces are
>>>>>rather small and dark, thus placing the human at a further disadvantage. The
>>>>>drawback of this machine is that if one can somehow survive the Tyson-style
>>>>>middle game, there is a very easy end game to follow - I'd rather my
>>>>>representative had strong end game skills (though the inevitable loss of morale
>>>>>from the middle game frights may throw him off his game (witness DB V GK '97
>>>>>game 2)).
>>>>>
>>>>>If anyone has some suggestions for programs which I can easily download,
>>>>>configure, and run under NT, and which have both a strong end game and a
>>>>>tactical middle game, I'd be very happy to read your suggestions!
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks for your help with this.
>>>>>
>>>>>Graham
>>>>
>>
>>I just had a flash of inspiration as to why, in the special situation of being a
>>queen down from the start, the 2 programs in my collection that put up the best
>>fight are Travel Champion 2100 (TC) and Rebel Decade 2.0 (RD).
>>
>>Both these programs put a high valuation on mobility!
>>
>>What happens when I give myself the opposite queen and play them is that first
>>they use their pawns and pieces to immobilise my position (so that I can't
>>either use my queen or swap off the other pieces), then, when I struggle to free
>>myself, they catch me in tactical traps!
>>
>>TC is especially good at this. Uniquely among the programs I have tried, it also
>>takes a lot of time over each of its moves - even though it is playing at G/5 -
>>often over 10 seconds per move. This could be really useful for my challenge as
>>well - lulling the opponent into a false sense of security.
>>
>>And what do TC and RD have in common? Dutch programmers. TC programmed by Franz
>>Morsch (the Fritz man), and RD programmed by Ed Schroder. Another Dutchman,
>>Johan De Koning, programmed Chessmaster (CM). This program, by reputation, is
>>also a mobility monster.
>
>
>
>You are absolutely right about Johan's program, but I have my doubts that Frans
>programs put big emphasis on mobility. Actually I think it's the opposite. I
>have often seen Fritz getting incredibly stupid positions where it had almost no
>mobility (bishops in the corner, knights in the back rank...), and it was happy
>with it. Maybe it was right, because sometimes it managed to get out of trouble
>by a tactical trick.
>
>Maybe more recent versions of Fritz are better in evaluating mobility, but I
>don't think the TC2100 knows much about this concept.
>
>
> Christophe
I bow to your superior knowledge - maybe mobility isn't the answer. But I'm
still going into the challenge tomorrow with TC2100. It's STREETS ahead of the
other programs I've tried in this special situation:
From my testing this weekend, here are my evaluations for programs in the
special situation of playing a (circa 1600) player with a queen disadvantage,
and the computer only having to make its moves in 5 minutes:
1. TC2100. Until the endgame, it fights relentlessly! It reduces the opponents
mobility, and sets up traps of subtlety and finesse. It is the undisputable
master of creating middle game mayhem. It actively avoids swapping material
where possible. It is a small, battery powered computer with a small, 10Mhz
processer and only 2k of RAM. Its middle game capabilities belie it's small
size.
I am personally unable to beat this computer under the test conditions. Franz
Morsch should be ashamed of himself for writing the program for this monsterous
little beast.
Granted, it's quite weak in the endgame - but in this particular special
situation, it is necessary to have fought yourself out of trouble before the
endgame arrives, otherwise it's lights out - even if you're Gary Kasparov.
2. Rebel Decade 2.0. It throws its pawns forward, and immobilises your position.
However, it is too eager to go for exchanges where you only get a small
advantage (e.g. a pawn) at the cost of simplifying the position, which is
suicide in this situation. I have personally been able to beat it without too
much difficulty under the challenge conditions (in a fair game, it eats me
alive).
3. The Crazy Bishop. Creates tactical complications, but again is too willing to
give up the tactical tension for a small material game. It's reasonably easy
for me to beat it under the challenge conditions - as long as I'm careful.
4. Bringer. Brilliant program - in fact, the only program I have that I can play
and lose to and not be able to understand why I lost. However, in the challenge
conditions, it is far too willing to simplify the position - even to the point
of offering to swap material!
So - if my colleague will let me, I'm going to choose little TC2100 to be my
champion tomorrow - then I think I'll win my 1 GBP!
Graham
>> The version I have, 2100, is certainly tricky to play
>>against - but I don't think that the early versions were programmed by Johan.
>>
>>Anyway, given that I can't use RD under NT, I think I'll go in on Monday with
>>TC, and persuade my colleague to play this machine instead of Bringer. Unless
>>any of you out there know of a program I can download which puts a lot of
>>emphasis on mobility - I'm still open to suggestions - there's still time...
>>
>>Thanks for your help, those of you who respond.
>>
>>Graham
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.