| |
Main
Date: 02 May 2008 22:56:16
From: Sanny
Subject: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
A week back Zebediah used to win in 20-30 moves but now the GetClubs
game was a bit improved now Zebediah takes 35 moves to win against the
Advance Level.
If you can spot any mistake in GetClubs game I can improve it further.
Please see the game and let me know which were the moves that were
wrong.
Advance Level thinks for 30 min/ move So it is very difficult for me
to find mistakes in Advance level game. Anyone having Commercial
program please do the analysis and let me know which were the moves
which were wrong by GetClub that Zebediah managed to win in just 34
moves.
Remember Advance level plays better than Rybka So you must analyze for
longer hours to give any good reasion.
I do not understand how zebediah manages to win Advance in just 35-40
Moves?
Game Played between zebediah and advance at GetClub.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
zebediah: (White)
advance: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM19903&game=Chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White -- Black
(zebediah) -- (advance)
1. e2-e4{6} c7-c5{0}
2. Ng1-f3{6} d7-d6{0}
3. d2-d4{4} c5-d4{0}
4. Nf3-d4{4} Ng8-f6{0}
5. Nb1-c3{6} e7-e5{2936}
6. Nd4-b5{26} a7-a6{1486}
7. Nb5-a3{4082} b7-b5{2074}
8. Nc3-d5{12} Bc8-e6{1688}
9. Bc1-g5{1676} Be6-d5{2220}
10. e4-d5{330} Qd8-a5{1444}
11. Bg5-d2{3038} Qa5-b6{1664}
12. c2-c4{188} Nb8-d7{1740}
13. c4-b5{104} Qb6-d4{2188}
14. Na3-c2{470} Qd4-d5{1930}
15. b5-a6{8} Qd5-e4{2428}
16. Bf1-e2{234} Ra8-c8{1372}
17. Nc2-e3{146} d6-d5{1470}
18. Ke1-g1{514} d5-d4{2022}
19. Ne3-g4{2370} Bf8-d6{2848}
20. Ng4-f6{40} Nd7-f6{1844}
21. Be2-b5{22} Ke8-f8{1570}
22. Ra1-c1{518} Qe4-a8{3138}
23. Rc1-c8{104} Qa8-c8{2868}
24. a6-a7{128} Nf6-d5{1558}
25. Qd1-g4{9374} Qc8-d8{2452}
26. Bb5-c6{410} Nd5-f6{1798}
27. Qg4-f5{136} Kf8-e7{2228}
28. Rf1-e1{78} Rh8-e8{1954}
29. Re1-e5{1294} Bd6-e5{2270}
30. Qf5-e5{164} Ke7-f8{2438}
31. Bc6-e8{34} d4-d3{2956}
32. Be8-c6{192} Nf6-d5{1938}
33. Qe5-d5{52} Qd8-d5{2212}
34. Bd2-b4{8990} Qd5-c6{0}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
zebediah: (White)
advance: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM19903&game=Chess
After analyzing the game with Computer have you found any mistake in
Advance Levels Game?
Is it making Tactical Mistakes or it is doing Strategy Mistake. Please
Explain the mistake So that I really undersatand what went wrong.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|
| |
Date: 10 May 2008 04:32:18
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
> Sanny, simply provide a link, so that
> I will be able to replay the game on
> the screen just by clicking on the moves.
> Otherwise forget it.
>
> =A0 =A0 Wlod
View Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?
id=3DDM19903&game=3DChess
I always give the link to Recorded game on top.
Bye
Sanny
|
| |
Date: 10 May 2008 03:05:32
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
On May 10, 2:30 am, "Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)"
<[email protected] > wrote:
> > Game Played between zebediah and advance at GetClub.com
>
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > zebediah: (White)
> > advance: (Black)
> > Game Played at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> > View Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM19903&game=Chess
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > White -- Black
> > (zebediah) -- (advance)
>
> > 1. e2-e4{6} c7-c5{0}
> > 2. [etc]
>
> Sanny, instead of the score provide a link
> to the game, so that I can replay it on the
> screen by click-clicking. Otherwise forget it.
Someone has not been eating his Wheaties... .
Sanny includes *both* in his postings: a link for
those who are lazy bots like me, *plus* the game
score, for those who prefer to cut-and-paste into
their favorite GUI program. Trouble is, his score
is non-standard, so the cut-and-paste method
most likely won't work. Even so, there are a few
really strong players who don't need a graphical
board to "see" what is going on; these few, I have
heard (but would have no way of knowing, of
course) can replay the games in their minds, just
by looking at the score!
Unfortunately, this foresight on Sanny's part is
always overlooked, since there are no really
strong players here in rgc... (snicker).
Oh, and it is of course a simple matter to type
"http://www.getclub.com/" into your browser,
then scroll through just the last couple of games
played... click... click... hmmm, I think Zeb may
like Fritz 10, or maybe Shredder 7, or maybe it
is Chessmaster. Zeb's program is stronger than
the GetClub program, by far. But I think Rybka
can give it greater odds, because it is stronger
still.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 10 May 2008 01:15:32
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
On May 2, 10:56 pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> zebediah: (White)
> advance: (Black)
> Game Played at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> View Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM19903&game=Chess
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> White -- Black
> (zebediah) -- (advance)
>
> 1. e2-e4{6} c7-c5{0}
Sanny, simply provide a link, so that
I will be able to replay the game on
the screen just by clicking on the moves.
Otherwise forget it.
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2008 23:30:54
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
On May 2, 10:56 pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> Game Played between zebediah and advance at GetClub.com
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> zebediah: (White)
> advance: (Black)
> Game Played at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> View Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM19903&game=Chess
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> White -- Black
> (zebediah) -- (advance)
>
> 1. e2-e4{6} c7-c5{0}
> 2. [etc]
Sanny, instead of the score provide a link
to the game, so that I can replay it on the
screen by click-clicking. Otherwise forget it.
Wlod
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2008 23:27:06
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
On May 10, 12:54 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> > Many years ago, a fellow came from out
> > of nowhere with achessprogram that was
> > stronger than all the others. It had a nice
> > GUI, nicerchesspieces than the number
> > two program, and most curious of all, it fit
> > on a single floppy disk as it was quite
> > small in addition to searching faster.
>
> Even GetClub Chess Program will fit in a floppy Disk
>
> GetClub Chess Program Size is Just 200 KB. While a Floppy can take 1.2
> MB. So you can pack 5 Chess Programs in a floppy.
Ah, yes-- the single-sided, single density era is
long over. In fact, I think the entire 5.25" floppy
disk era is over. One day, my collection will be
worth a fortune, and I will then donate it to the
Smithsonian, along with my old 8-track tapes.
> The thing is that the size is small but the complexity is very high.
>
> I think GetClub program is good enough for all Human Players. Only the
> player using other commercial programs are beating the higher levels.
Well, it is rumored that some kid called
"Nakamura" is now better than Roman D., who
himself was quite a computer-crusher in his
heyday. And if you recall, then-world champion
Kramnik was beating one of the world's top
chess programs... when he threw away the win,
and then overlooked a mate-in-one on himself!
Generally speaking, you might need to get up
to at least 2000 strength before declaring victory
over *all* humans.
> Only you are able to win the Master Level rest all are not going
> higher than Normal Level.
True. But then, nobody else can stand the
delay required to play the higher levels, so it is
not necessarily a case of being outclassed in
terms of strength.
One thing I have noticed is that when it comes
to attacking, your program is much too eager to
sacrifice material, and this makes it so that a
stubborn and patient defender can win without
much trouble. It is probably better to be a good
defender, and let the impatience of the human
animal work to destroy him.
Many years ago, I ran into a sort of "wall", a
rating line I could not get over. I decided to
play more aggressively, to /force/ my way to
victory against the lowly opponents I felt I was
superior to. This backfired, and I found myself
losing games I ought to have drawn. My rating
dropped, and this made me all the more
frustrated!
Then I decided to just stop making quite so
many stupid blunders, to force my despised
opponents to work hard for their wins or draws.
This worked much better, and I soon found that
in the course of many an even game, I needed
but one opportunity to seize the win, because
my technique was superior overall. I had no
"brilliancies", but I leaped ahead of those
other guys, into a new group of players. Now
my goal was to stop getting killed every time!
I began to nick them for draws, and eventually
became a real annoyance (deja vue)... .
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2008 21:54:34
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
> =A0 Many years ago, a fellow came from out
> of nowhere with achessprogram that was
> stronger than all the others. =A0It had a nice
> GUI, nicerchesspieces than the number
> two program, and most curious of all, it fit
> on a single floppy disk as it was quite
> small in addition to searching faster.
Even GetClub Chess Program will fit in a floppy Disk
GetClub Chess Program Size is Just 200 KB. While a Floppy can take 1.2
MB. So you can pack 5 Chess Programs in a floppy.
The thing is that the size is small but the complexity is very high.
I think GetClub program is good enough for all Human Players. Only the
player using other commercial programs are beating the higher levels.
Only you are able to win the Master Level rest all are not going
higher than Normal Level.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date:
From: Martin Brown
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2008 13:48:13
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
On May 9, 12:57 pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> > > 5. c4-b5{572} Bf8-d6{1506}
>
> > Words fail me. It is hard to imagine how any half decent evaluation
> > function can see this as a good move even at ply 1. Blocking in your own
> > QP with a bishop is doing whites job for him.
>
> This move was made as it want to take out the Bishop and do Chastling.
Ah, but it never did "do chastling" until it was far
too late. It appears that spite-checks are heavily
favored over both piece-development and castling.
> > > 6. e2-e4{104} Nf6-e4{1978}
>
> > And now the final coup de grace. Suicide chess anyone ???
>
> No it gives 2 points for killing 2 Center pawns and other 1 point for
> white King Comming out unprotected.
Unprotected? Note that even if the King were
"protected" by ten different men, White would
gain nothing; this is because the game ends if
the King is checkmated (i.e. to be captured),
so there is no "recapture" after the fact.
Even if the GetClub program calculated that
it would eventually get, say, three pawns for
the Knight, it would have only done so by
checking and eating pawns while the opponent
developed several pieces. This leaves two
problems in its wake: the Queen can either be
trapped or harried while developing even more
pieces; and normal development never happens
because of the constant need to defend the
Queen against such threats. Besides which,
there is no gain from getting three pawns for a
Knight; in order to come out ahead, you need
to bite one of the plastic pawns in two, then
play so that you end up with three, *plus* half
of the tasteless plastic pawn for the Knight.
Watch out for lead weights! They can be hell
to bite through. Better still, only sac' a piece
if you get four pawns in the deal.
> and Look at White position its
> none of the pieces is developed.
White spent time building up a wall of pawns
in the center. Apart from a sacrifice, as in this
game, the pieces can be developed later,
behind the protection of those pawns, which
act as a shield.
In closed positions, /time/ is not quite the
same as it is in open positions. So long as
there is no significant interaction between the
two armies, maneuvering is feasible.
In this opening (the Benko* Gambit), Black
does best if he /fianchettos/ the King's Bishop,
so it can work in conjunction with the Queen
and Rooks to attack on the Queenside. The
move ...e5 blocks the long diagonal, and so
it is not usually combined with the ...b5 pawn
gambit. If you want to block the center, it is
better to (still) /fianchetto/ the King's Bishop,
and then play for ...f5, as in the King's Indian
Defense. In any case, Black will end up
playing pawn-to-d6.
> This Program is so large that if I have to read whole program line by
> line, it will take me full day. So its very difficult to go through
> all the codes and correct them.
Many years ago, a fellow came from out
of nowhere with a chess program that was
stronger than all the others. It had a nice
GUI, nicer chess pieces than the number
two program, and most curious of all, it fit
on a single floppy disk as it was quite
small in addition to searching faster.
Unless you have lots of text in your chess
program (i.e. "this subroutine gives a bonus
for 'chastling', and causes every level to
think extra-long if the opponent's handle =
'help bot' "), this may well be an indication
of redundancy or poor organization.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2008 09:57:41
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
> > 5. c4-b5{572} Bf8-d6{1506}
>
> Words fail me. It is hard to imagine how any half decent evaluation
> function can see this as a good move even at ply 1. Blocking in your own
> QP with a bishop is doing whites job for him.
This move was made as it want to take out the Bishop and do Chastling.
I have given points for piece development and chastling. Bishop if
goes out at 5..... Bf8-e7 Then it would have played d6 and Blocked the
Bishop and it has to go back to f8.
> Bd6 is Shredders 15th ranked choice of 26 moves so pick a move at random
> and you have better than even chances of improving Getclubs play here.
>
> 5. ... d6 and black is pretty well on track for a strong game.
> 5. ... e4 looks interesting too (not sure I would risk it).
>
> > 6. e2-e4{104} Nf6-e4{1978}
>
> And now the final coup de grace. Suicide chess anyone ???
No it gives 2 points for killing 2 Center pawns and other 1 point for
white King Comming out unprotected. and Look at White position its
none of the pieces is developed.
> Would do at a pinch. Otherwise engine annotation ignores the illegal
> moves and the game after a promotion is complete gibberish.
>
> Humans would also like to have castles shown as O-O not Ke1-g2 and
> captures shown with the standard "x" capture notation Nf6xe4 not Nf6-e4
> and mark checks with +.
Yes, I will see if that can be corrected. It is very difficult to
modify the code as changing one line of code brings new Bugs and then
a week is wasted in correcting the Bugs.
Its like when we fly Kites. When the threads messup how difficult it
is to correct the jumbeled threads.
This Program is so large that if I have to read whole program line by
line, it will take me full day. So its very difficult to go through
all the codes and correct them.
Bye
Sanny
|
| | |
Date: 11 May 2008 18:15:36
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
On Fri, 9 May 2008 09:57:41 -0700 (PDT), Sanny <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
>Yes, I will see if that can be corrected. It is very difficult to
>modify the code as changing one line of code brings new Bugs and then
>a week is wasted in correcting the Bugs.
That statement tells me quite at least 2 things:
1) There's a lot of copy and paste in your code (parts tend to look
alike, with minor modifications... some question as to whether making
a change is the right one).
2) You're probably not using the benefits of Java. Your display might
be OO, but I doubt that your chess analysis part did. What I know
about some contemporary chess engines (the company I work for built
the boards for Deep Blue) is that they evaluate each space.
You can score the piece count, but you also can score position...
Simplistically by how many squares are controlled. You only have 3
different kind of squares.
Also I have to agree with what someone else said. For testing
purposes, you really should work on handling position notation. One of
the beauties of chess is the state of the game can store in so few
bytes (64 and be comfortable). If you have a position that is, say, a
mate in 5, you can try that position against different versions (and
load it against different opponents as well).
Checks and draws should be some sort of function... I forget whether
you play a particular sound when the person is in check, but you can
use it for that, and also to put a '+' in the notation (or '#' for
checkmate).
>
>Its like when we fly Kites. When the threads messup how difficult it
>is to correct the jumbeled threads.
>
>This Program is so large that if I have to read whole program line by
>line, it will take me full day. So its very difficult to go through
>all the codes and correct them.
200K isn't that large, even for a one-person project.
>
>Bye
>Sanny
|
| | | |
Date:
From: Martin Brown
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
|
| | | | |
Date: 12 May 2008 23:05:33
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
On Mon, 12 May 2008 08:38:04 +0100, Martin Brown
<
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2008 08:18:00
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
helpbot said above:
"You may not realize it, but many of the more
recent complaints were not about your program
being /weak/; they were and always have been
about your gross exaggerations, including all
the claims to have removed alleged "bugs" or
to have made the program stronger than Rybka
and so forth."
I admit I have been one of the enthusiastic GitClub bashers, but the
statement above is completely true. The annoyance with GitClub is in
its failure to follow the rules of chess, in claiming draws as wins,
and all the rest. As far as playing strength, it seems easily a match
for the typical USCF class C player, and maybe it's even better than
that at the higher levels. Sanny would gain instant respect and much
more positive attention and feedback if he would drop the foolish
bragging, take GitClub for what it is, and continually work on
improvements while maintaining a decently modest posture. For a Java-
based program, we've got to admit that it really is not so bad at all,
and the path to it getting a lot better is clear and evident (just
fixing the problems with the King hiding out in the endgame, for
instance, would be an enormous strength improvement).
GitClub will never beat Rybka like carrots. But it can certainly make
a decent showing. Please, Sanny, skip the hype and spam and silliness
and just work on the product. It will pay dividends.
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2008 00:45:27
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
On May 9, 1:19 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> zebediah: (White)
> advance: (Black)
> Game Played at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> View Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM20056&game=Chess
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> White -- Black
> (zebediah) -- (advance)
>
> 1. d2-d4{8} Ng8-f6{0}
> 2. c2-c4{2} c7-c5{0}
> 3. d4-d5{2} b7-b5{0}
> 4. f2-f3{22} e7-e5{0}
> 5. c4-b5{572} Bf8-d6{1506}
> 6. e2-e4{104} Nf6-e4{1978}
> 7. f3-e4{14} Qd8-h4{2114}
> 8. Ke1-e2{8} Qh4-e4{2258}
> 9. Ke2-f2{6} c5-c4{2254}
> 10. Bc1-e3{356} Qe4-f5{3408}
> 11. Qd1-f3{30} Qf5-c2{2238}
> 12. Nb1-d2{28} f7-f5{2234}
> 13. Qf3-e2{632} Bd6-b4{3888}
> 14. Qe2-c4{1112} Qc2-c4{1666}
> 15. Nd2-c4{256} f5-f4{2030}
> 16. Be3-d2{6} Bb4-d2{1590}
> 17. Nc4-d2{108} Ke8-g8{1284}
> 18. d5-d6{208} Bc8-b7{1758}
> 19. Bf1-c4{14} Kg8-h8{1396}
> 20. Ra1-e1{398} Rf8-e8{2144}
> 21. Ng1-f3{274} e5-e4{1730}
> 22. Nd2-e4{34} Re8-e4{2102}
> 23. Re1-e4{22} Bb7-e4{1412}
> 24. Rh1-e1{38} Be4-g6{1834}
> 25. Bc4-d5{5788} Nb8-c6{1806}
> 26. b5-c6{12} d7-c6{1816}
> 27. Nf3-e5{104} c6-d5{1324}
> 28. Ne5-g6{222} h7-g6{1616}
> 29. d6-d7{6} Ra8-g8{2486}
> 30. Re1-e8{14} Rg8-e8{2828}
> 31. Qd7-e8{Q}{14} Kh8-h7{1954}
> 32. Kf2-f3{4732} a7-a5{1770}
> 33. Kf3-f4{358} d5-d4{1808}
> 34. Kf4-g5{444} d4-d3{170}
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> zebediah: (White)
> advance: (Black)
> Game Played at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> View Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM20056&game=Chess
>
> What were the wrong moves that Zebediah was able to win despite it was
> Advance Level which thinks for 1/2 an hour?
First of all, the move 4. ... e5 does not fit in particularly
well with this system for Black. Generally speaking,
the idea is to /fianchetto/ the King's Bishop, and then
bear down on the Queen-side pawns-- not block the
center with Black's pawns.
Secondly, 5. ... Bd6 is a very clumsy move; the
Bishop looks like an overgrown pawn on that square,
blocked in by two of its fellow men.
Third, the sacrifice 6. ... Nxe4 loses decisive material,
presumably in exchange for the following meaningless
spite-checks. It's fairly simple, really: you need to get
(at least) THREE pawns for a Knight. And in order for
such an "attack" to succeed, you have to have some
other pieces developed, so they can jump into the
fracas quickly.
One more thing: it is quite obvious that Zebediah is
operating a chess engine; every game I have thus far
seen fits the computer style to a Tee. So you have
virtually no chance here. I wouldn't worry about Zeb
or Rybka winning; it's no biggie, really. In my
opinion, Zeb's program is not as good as Rybka, so
you could beat him by pulling a switcheroo... . ; >D
One move that the GetClub program consistently
eschewed was the ultra-obvious ... O-O. The Black
Queen bounced all over the place delivering harm-
less spite-checks while White developed all of its
pieces, like normal chess programs do.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 08 May 2008 22:19:06
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
That game was played by EASY level. Heres a game by Advance Level
where Zebediah gave lots of sacrifices and win the game in just 34
moves.
In this game Zebediah was a knight ahead but later sacrificed its
knight to bring a quick end.
Game Played between zebediah and advance at GetClub.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
zebediah: (White)
advance: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM20056&game=Chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White -- Black
(zebediah) -- (advance)
1. d2-d4{8} Ng8-f6{0}
2. c2-c4{2} c7-c5{0}
3. d4-d5{2} b7-b5{0}
4. f2-f3{22} e7-e5{0}
5. c4-b5{572} Bf8-d6{1506}
6. e2-e4{104} Nf6-e4{1978}
7. f3-e4{14} Qd8-h4{2114}
8. Ke1-e2{8} Qh4-e4{2258}
9. Ke2-f2{6} c5-c4{2254}
10. Bc1-e3{356} Qe4-f5{3408}
11. Qd1-f3{30} Qf5-c2{2238}
12. Nb1-d2{28} f7-f5{2234}
13. Qf3-e2{632} Bd6-b4{3888}
14. Qe2-c4{1112} Qc2-c4{1666}
15. Nd2-c4{256} f5-f4{2030}
16. Be3-d2{6} Bb4-d2{1590}
17. Nc4-d2{108} Ke8-g8{1284}
18. d5-d6{208} Bc8-b7{1758}
19. Bf1-c4{14} Kg8-h8{1396}
20. Ra1-e1{398} Rf8-e8{2144}
21. Ng1-f3{274} e5-e4{1730}
22. Nd2-e4{34} Re8-e4{2102}
23. Re1-e4{22} Bb7-e4{1412}
24. Rh1-e1{38} Be4-g6{1834}
25. Bc4-d5{5788} Nb8-c6{1806}
26. b5-c6{12} d7-c6{1816}
27. Nf3-e5{104} c6-d5{1324}
28. Ne5-g6{222} h7-g6{1616}
29. d6-d7{6} Ra8-g8{2486}
30. Re1-e8{14} Rg8-e8{2828}
31. Qd7-e8{Q}{14} Kh8-h7{1954}
32. Kf2-f3{4732} a7-a5{1770}
33. Kf3-f4{358} d5-d4{1808}
34. Kf4-g5{444} d4-d3{170}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
zebediah: (White)
advance: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM20056&game=Chess
What were the wrong moves that Zebediah was able to win despite it was
Advance Level which thinks for 1/2 an hour?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date:
From: Martin Brown
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
|
| |
Date: 07 May 2008 14:40:17
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
On May 4, 3:23 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> Here is the Game Rybka wins Easy Level in just 33 moves. Despite the
> improvements suggested by you Rybka had the upper hand.
Whoa there! If you want to implement *my* advice,
then you need to remove Rybka's QN before firing up
the two engines. : >D
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Rybka : (White)
> easy: (Black)
> Game Played at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> View Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM19930&game=Chess
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> White -- Black
> (Rybka ) -- (easy)
>
> 1. e2-e4{18} e7-e5{0}
> 2. Ng1-f3{16} Nb8-c6{0}
> 3. Bf1-b5{14} a7-a6{0}
> 4. Bb5-a4{14} d7-d6{0}
> 5. c2-c3{14} b7-b5{24}
> 6. Ba4-c2{16} Ng8-f6{32}
> 7. d2-d4{14} e5-d4{24}
> 8. c3-d4{14} Bc8-g4{22}
> 9. Ke1-g1{16} Nc6-b4{34}
> 10. Bc2-b3{18} Nf6-e4{24}
> 11. a2-a3{16} d6-d5{22}
> 12. a3-b4{20} c7-c6{54}
> 13. Qd1-c2{14} Qd8-c8{28}
> 14. Nf3-e5{18} Bg4-d7{24}
> 15. Nb1-c3{36} Ne4-f6{26}
> 16. Qc2-e2{18} Bd7-e6{32}
> 17. Nc3-a4{24} Ra8-b8{34}
> 18. Na4-c5{16} Bf8-c5{26}
> 19. b4-c5{16} Ke8-g8{30}
> 20. Bb3-c2{16} Rf8-d8{24}
> 21. Rf1-e1{20} Rb8-a8{56}
> 22. Qe2-d3{22} h7-h6{38}
> 23. Qd3-g3{24} Kg8-f8{44}
> 24. Qg3-f3{18} Be6-g4{20}
> 25. Qf3-f4{16} h6-h5{22}
> 26. h2-h3{24} Bg4-d7{34}
> 27. Qf4-f3{16} Bd7-e8{32}
> 28. Bc1-g5{20} Nf6-e4{28}
> 29. Ne5-g6{32} Kf8-g8{48}
> 30. Ng6-e7{16} Kg8-f8{22}
> 31. Ne7-c8{18} Ne4-g5{20}
> 32. Qf3-h5{14} Ng5-h3{24}
> 33. g2-h3{16} Kf8-g8{22}
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> So what are the moves that you think are wrong by GetClub?
Sanny, you cannot compete on even terms with
the Rybka program. After *decades* of work by
amateur and professional programmers -- some of
whom were very strong players -- Rybka has come
out on top, besting countless other chess engines.
You should be satisfied if you can remove all the
bugs, make the program play exactly in accordance
with the complex rules of chess, and improve the
Web site's overall look and feel. You don't need to
get to a strength of 3000+ like Rybka; especially
in view of your using a Java applet.
The above game was very well played by Rybka.
Although the thinking-time was probably *short*, it
is interesting to see how the program varied from
conventional human thinking in the Ruy Lopez
opening, and with success. Typically, the GetClub
program was all too willing to accept a couple of
pawns in exchange for a piece, but here the Rybka
tactical machine managed to save the b4-pawn,
while conducting an amazing display of attacking
skill against the un-castled enemy King.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 07 May 2008 09:38:44
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
> It is a fairly simple tactical error. It isn't a good idea to move the
> queen excessively, give spite checks that help your opponent to develop
> minor pieces or to trap your own queen. And letting him grab a huge
> queenside pawn advantage early on isn't very smart either.
After this game was played, GetClub was further improved
Now Zebediah takes 50-60 moves to win against the Advance Level. So I
find him playing with Master Level.
He is able to win Master Level in 35 Moves earlier He used to win
Advance Level in 35 moves So there is a great improvement in GetClubs
Game recently. Now, It Plays Roughly 4 times Stronger than earlier..
Game Played between zebediah and master at GetClub.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
zebediah: (White)
master: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM20011&game=Chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White -- Black
(zebediah) -- (master)
1. e2-e4{2} e7-e5{0}
2. Ng1-f3{4} Nb8-c6{0}
3. Bf1-c4{4} Ng8-f6{0}
4. Nf3-g5{22} d7-d5{334}
5. e4-d5{32} Nc6-b4{356}
6. d2-d4{308} Bc8-g4{528}
7. f2-f3{44} Bg4-f5{482}
8. Ke1-g1{302} Nf6-d5{362}
9. Nb1-c3{1088} b7-b5{0}
10. Bc4-b5{1468} c7-c6{616}
11. Bb5-a4{190} e5-d4{338}
12. Nc3-d5{222} Qd8-d5{474}
13. a2-a3{196} Bf8-d6{360}
14. Rf1-e1{136} Ke8-f8{758}
15. a3-b4{6} h7-h6{492}
16. Ng5-e4{220} Bd6-c7{692}
17. Ba4-b3{364} Qd5-d8{654}
18. Qd1-e2{608} Bc7-b6{458}
19. Kg1-h1{194} Kf8-g8{792}
20. Bc1-f4{946} Qd8-h4{560}
21. g2-g3{3580} Qh4-h3{0}
22. Ne4-f2{8} Qh3-h5{632}
23. g3-g4{70} Qh5-h4{670}
24. Bf4-g3{46} Qh4-g5{726}
25. g4-f5{6} Qg5-f5{354}
26. Nf2-e4{90} d4-d3{340}
27. c2-d3{50} Ra8-d8{360}
28. Ne4-d6{76} Rd8-d6{358}
29. Bg3-d6{8} Qf5-g6{656}
30. d3-d4{2784} Bb6-d4{388}
31. Ra1-d1{794} Qg6-d6{416}
32. Bb3-f7{70} Kg8-f7{384}
33. Rd1-d4{72} Qd6-f6{554}
34. Rd4-f4{898} Rh8-b8{502}
35. Rf4-f6{18} Kf7-f6{244}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
zebediah: (White)
master: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM20011&game=Chess
There was a Tactical Mistake Else Master Level could have fought even
longer.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date:
From: Martin Brown
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
|
| |
Date: 04 May 2008 21:01:49
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
On May 4, 1:40 pm, zzz <[email protected] > wrote:
> > It's already playing a fairly tough game. I note
> > that Zeb is using a computer, and someone
> > called ChessChallenger7 is obviously doing so
> > as well.
>
> I'll take that as a compliment, but ChessChallenger7 is a mere human,
> namely me :-).
Sorry. I assumed that the moniker was deliberately
chosen to make it clear that the player was merely
operating that particular chess computer. I did not
"examine" the games and then decide that, WOW,
these fantastic moves can only mean one thing... .
In Zeb's case, I have seen several of his games,
and the moves themselves clearly indicate that Zeb
is operating a chess computer.
There was some discussion here a while back,
about how well the GetClub program would likely
do versus other programs; next thing I know, the
new moniker popped up, and I assumed this was
a cause/result type of thing.
> The original Chess Challenger 7 was a stand-alone chess computer made
> in 1978 by Fidelity Electronics. I inherited one from my uncle in the
> early 80's.
Someone told me flatly that his Fidelity Chess
Challenger 8 could "give anyone Queen odds". I
thought he was full of baloney, and promptly
started such a game to show what a silly idea
that was. After fighting the monstrosity for hours,
I just managed to win-- by a nose. Boy, did I feel
stupid.
> It was my intention to have it play a couple of games against GetClub,
> but unfortunately - and to my great disappointment - it was no longer
> working :-(.
> Since I had already made a login for it, I thought I might as well use
> it and play a couple of games against GetClub myself.
So, how do you explain your 1. e4 -- the very same
move that CC7 preferred? ; >D
> A while back I did run a few games against GetClub with another
> antique chess computer: Par Excellence (built in 1986, also by
> Fidelity Electronics).
> Par Excellence was leading by something like 8-1. Not bad, considering
> it's running on hardware that's more than 500 times slower than the
> machine that's running the GetClub applet.
I don't know much about how much a Java applet
slows things down. I do know that in spite of what
the rating lists now say about the older programs, at
one time the Par Excellence was considered to be
pretty good. Over the course of many years, I've
played several of the Fidelity computers.
I imagine that your 8-1 score only has meaning if
you also take into consideration the thinking times
for each side. In some of Sanny's experiments, he
was reporting greater numbers for Rybka, but then
it turned out that in fact, he had been shorting her
to compensate for the Java applet's slowness. Ever
since, it just seemed pointless to play those two
against one another-- except with Rybka giving
odds.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 04 May 2008 20:38:25
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
On May 4, 3:23 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> > I am now going to play a game against Rybka and see if the improvement
> > is useful or not and post the game below for you to see how good it
> > plays against Rybka.
>
> Here is the Game Rybka wins Easy Level in just 33 moves. Despite the
> improvements suggested by you Rybka had the upper hand.
>
> But Still GetClub handled the position for quite sometime.
>
> Do you see that the program now do not take out the Queen aimlessly.
>
> What else can be done to improve GetClub?
One thing you cannot compete against is the raw
speed of calculation of the top chess programs.
Where your Java applet may indicate, say, a depth
of twelve plys, such a program as Rybka or Fritz
might well be looking much deeper in the same
amount of time.
I don't know much about all the tricks that modern
programmers use to speed up the search; in fact, I
doubt I could implement "pruning" without a lot of
help, let alone more sophisticated tricks. I do know
that a program that cannot get the basics of tactics
down pat is not likely to compete, since basic tactics
are the keystone of strong chess. In fact, even if you
wrote a program which was as dumb as a box of
rocks when it came to positional play, if it was very
strong at tactics it would probably beat most human
opponents more often than not.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 04 May 2008 10:50:26
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
> A while back I did run a few games againstGetClubwith another
> antiquechesscomputer: Par Excellence (built in 1986, also by
> Fidelity Electronics).
> Par Excellence was leading by something like 8-1. Not bad, considering
> it's running on hardware that's more than 500 times slower than the
> machine that's running theGetClubapplet.
Try again, I am sure you will see a lot of difference as now the
GetClub game plays much better that it used to earlier.
Can "Par Excellence" still beat the GetClub Chess? How much time you
give to each move? There is one username: "Par Excellence" at GetClub
is that you?
GetClub is improving a lot these days due to Help Bots advices and the
games you play.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 04 May 2008 10:40:38
From: zzz
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
> It's already playing a fairly tough game. I note
> that Zeb is using a computer, and someone
> called ChessChallenger7 is obviously doing so
> as well.
I'll take that as a compliment, but ChessChallenger7 is a mere human,
namely me :-).
The original Chess Challenger 7 was a stand-alone chess computer made
in 1978 by Fidelity Electronics. I inherited one from my uncle in the
early 80's.
It was my intention to have it play a couple of games against GetClub,
but unfortunately - and to my great disappointment - it was no longer
working :-(.
Since I had already made a login for it, I thought I might as well use
it and play a couple of games against GetClub myself.
A while back I did run a few games against GetClub with another
antique chess computer: Par Excellence (built in 1986, also by
Fidelity Electronics).
Par Excellence was leading by something like 8-1. Not bad, considering
it's running on hardware that's more than 500 times slower than the
machine that's running the GetClub applet.
|
| |
Date: 04 May 2008 00:23:46
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
> I am now going to play a game against Rybka and see if the improvement
> is useful or not and post the game below for you to see how good it
> plays against Rybka.
Here is the Game Rybka wins Easy Level in just 33 moves. Despite the
improvements suggested by you Rybka had the upper hand.
But Still GetClub handled the position for quite sometime.
Do you see that the program now do not take out the Queen aimlessly.
What else can be done to improve GetClub?
Do you still see something wrong in GetClubs play other than Tactics?
Game Played between Rybka and easy at GetClub.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rybka : (White)
easy: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM19930&game=Chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White -- Black
(Rybka ) -- (easy)
1. e2-e4{18} e7-e5{0}
2. Ng1-f3{16} Nb8-c6{0}
3. Bf1-b5{14} a7-a6{0}
4. Bb5-a4{14} d7-d6{0}
5. c2-c3{14} b7-b5{24}
6. Ba4-c2{16} Ng8-f6{32}
7. d2-d4{14} e5-d4{24}
8. c3-d4{14} Bc8-g4{22}
9. Ke1-g1{16} Nc6-b4{34}
10. Bc2-b3{18} Nf6-e4{24}
11. a2-a3{16} d6-d5{22}
12. a3-b4{20} c7-c6{54}
13. Qd1-c2{14} Qd8-c8{28}
14. Nf3-e5{18} Bg4-d7{24}
15. Nb1-c3{36} Ne4-f6{26}
16. Qc2-e2{18} Bd7-e6{32}
17. Nc3-a4{24} Ra8-b8{34}
18. Na4-c5{16} Bf8-c5{26}
19. b4-c5{16} Ke8-g8{30}
20. Bb3-c2{16} Rf8-d8{24}
21. Rf1-e1{20} Rb8-a8{56}
22. Qe2-d3{22} h7-h6{38}
23. Qd3-g3{24} Kg8-f8{44}
24. Qg3-f3{18} Be6-g4{20}
25. Qf3-f4{16} h6-h5{22}
26. h2-h3{24} Bg4-d7{34}
27. Qf4-f3{16} Bd7-e8{32}
28. Bc1-g5{20} Nf6-e4{28}
29. Ne5-g6{32} Kf8-g8{48}
30. Ng6-e7{16} Kg8-f8{22}
31. Ne7-c8{18} Ne4-g5{20}
32. Qf3-h5{14} Ng5-h3{24}
33. g2-h3{16} Kf8-g8{22}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rybka : (White)
easy: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM19930&game=Chess
So what are the moves that you think are wrong by GetClub?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date:
From: Martin Brown
Subject: Re: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
|
| |
Date: 03 May 2008 23:48:47
From: Sanny
Subject: Help Bot Advice adopted.
|
> =A0 I can run that particular game through to try
> and pinpoint specific "sub-optimal" moves, but
> all that would accomplish is a wasteful focusing
> on onechessposition out of bazillions. =A0The
> obvious (to me) problem is that the program is
> going for spite-checks and chasing after pawns
> with its Queen, when it ought to be developing
> *all* its pieces. =A0 Do you really think you can
> "improve" the program more by focusing on a
> single move from a single game, than by fixing
> a serious problem which affects *many* such
> games?
Now your advice was understood and a penalty was given for Queen
giving spite checks and moving arround.
Now I think Zebediah will take +10 moves to win the Advance Level. And
it will be much difficult for you to win games now as it will develop
its pieces first inspite of giving Checks.
I am now going to play a game against Rybka and see if the improvement
is useful or not and post the game below for you to see how good it
plays against Rybka.
I wonder why many times Rybka program just Hangs and I am unable to
finish the game. May be it disconnects.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 03 May 2008 23:01:49
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
On May 4, 1:16 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> > > A week back Zebediah used to win in 20-30 moves but now the GetClubs
> > > game was a bit improved now Zebediah takes 35 moves to win against the
> > > Advance Level.
>
> > That was just one game; you can't draw sweeping
> > conclusions from the lengths of single games.
>
> Actually Last 2 games First he took 40 moves to win and in second game
> he took 35 moves to win against Advance Level. Earlier he used to win
> in 20-30 moves. So I see +10 moves needed for him to win after the Bug
> was removed.
But the length of a game -- or two -- only indicates
how sharp the play was, how wild and woolly the
tactics. It is a rather poor indicator of chess strength,
unless you have a large sample size and are
comparing players with similar styles. I imagine
that Tigran Petrosian -- a former world champ -- may
very well have taken three times longer to win than,
say, Zeb-the-computer-operator does. Does that
mean he was "weak"?
> > > I do not understand how zebediah manages to win Advance in just 35-40
> > > Moves?
> > Zeb is quite obviously using some other chess
> > program.
> It is because of Zrb I am able to improve the game further as he is
> able to kill the program with ease.
But anybody -- including you -- with a commercial
program can "kill" the GetClub program with ease.
Most modern chess engines are around 2600-3000
strength, running on modern hardware.
> > > After analyzing the game with Computer have you found any mistake in
> > > Advance Levels Game?
I can run that particular game through to try
and pinpoint specific "sub-optimal" moves, but
all that would accomplish is a wasteful focusing
on one chess position out of bazillions. The
obvious (to me) problem is that the program is
going for spite-checks and chasing after pawns
with its Queen, when it ought to be developing
*all* its pieces. Do you really think you can
"improve" the program more by focusing on a
single move from a single game, than by fixing
a serious problem which affects *many* such
games?
> > It doesn't require a computer to do that. One move
> > that was sub-optimal is 34. ...Qxc6. Generally
> > speaking, one should always avoid allowing one's
> > King to be captured for no reason.
> Since the game Resigned at 34th move Actually Advance has found a Mate
> in 10 or 12 and in such cases all moves are of equal score.
If Zeb-the-computer-operator is bothering you
so much, why not focus more on strong defense?
First and foremost, the King should be protected,
even if moves are somehow hidden from view;
saving time by scoring all moves as equal when
losing is of no advantage; why not go ahead and
try to score moves correctly, from beginning to
end? Avoid being checkmated, or, if that is
impossible, delay the loss for as long as, um,
"humanly" possible. The same goes for losing
material.
> > > Is it making Tactical Mistakes or it is doing Strategy Mistake. Please
> > > Explain the mistake So that I really undersatand what went wrong.
>
> > Oh dear, that is a very tall order.
>
> Thanks for your help. I will update the program and lets see if it can
> play a bit better with the suggestions you made.
It's already playing a fairly tough game. I note
that Zeb is using a computer, and someone
called ChessChallenger7 is obviously doing so
as well. It is possible that many of the loses
are not to human opponents, but to other chess
engines.
You may not realize it, but many of the more
recent complaints were not about your program
being /weak/; they were and always have been
about your gross exaggerations, including all
the claims to have removed alleged "bugs" or
to have made the program stronger than Rybka
and so forth. Only a relative few have tried to
maintain that, because you say it's strength is
2400, it must really be about 400. Personally,
I think its strength in tactics makes it a very
dangerous opponent to most humans, just as
with other chess programs. Any weaknesses
in the endgame may be moot against most
human opponents, because... before the
endgame, the gods have placed the middle
game (and the opening).
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 03 May 2008 22:16:59
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
On May 4, 12:04=A0am, help bot <[email protected] > wrote:
> On May 3, 1:56 am, Sanny <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > A week back Zebediah used to win in 20-30 moves but now the GetClubs
> > game was a bit improved now Zebediah takes 35 moves to win against the
> > Advance Level.
>
> =A0 That was just one game; you can't draw sweeping
> conclusions from the lengths of single games.
Actually Last 2 games First he took 40 moves to win and in second game
he took 35 moves to win against Advance Level. Earlier he used to win
in 20-30 moves. So I see +10 moves needed for him to win after the Bug
was removed.
> > If you can spot any mistake in GetClubs game I can improve it further.
>
> > Please see the game and let me know which were the moves that were
> > wrong.
>
> =A0 The GetClub program neglects normal piece development
> in favor of marauding Queen moves. =A0This is a hallmark of
> most weak /human/ players as well.
Yes, I will look into that and see why it does that.
> > Advance Level thinks for 30 min/ move So it is very difficult for me
> > to find mistakes in Advance level game. Anyone having Commercial
> > program please do the analysis and let me know which were the moves
> > which were wrong byGetClubthat Zebediah managed to win in just 34
> > moves.
>
> =A0 Rather than try to pinpoint specific moves, it may
> help to simply point out that in this loss, just as in
> many, many others, the program "forgot" to develop
> its King-side pieces and castle. =A0The result is that
> much of the game if fought with just half its army.
Ok I will see if that can be corrected.
> > I do not understand how zebediah manages to win Advance in just 35-40
> > Moves?
>
> =A0 Zeb is quite obviously using some otherchess
> program.
It is because of Zrb I am able to improve the game further as he is
able to kill the program with ease.
> > After analyzing the game with Computer have you found any mistake in
> > Advance Levels Game?
>
> =A0 It doesn't require a computer to do that. =A0One move
> that was sub-optimal is 34. ...Qxc6. =A0Generally
> speaking, one should always avoid allowing one's
> King to be captured for no reason.
Since the game Resigned at 34th move Actually Advance has found a Mate
in 10 or 12 and in such cases all moves are of equal score.
> > Is it making Tactical Mistakes or it is doing Strategy Mistake. Please
> > Explain the mistake So that I really undersatand what went wrong.
>
> =A0 Oh dear, that is a very tall order.
Thanks for your help. I will update the program and lets see if it can
play a bit better with the suggestions you made.
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> =A0 You need to coax the program into developing its
> pieces and bringing its King to safety, instead of
> chasing after spite-checks and wild tactical
> skirmishes, the result of which is very unclear.
>
> =A0 For instance, a while back you explained that the
> reason it was losing via N-g5, Nxf7 suicide attacks
> was that you gave a large bonus for spite-checks,
> which of course was backfiring against decent
> opponents (although it might work against weaker
> ones).
That was because of a bug and that bug has been removed 5 days back.
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> =A0 I wouldn't worry too much about losing to Zeb'schessprogram;
> for all we know, it could be one of
> the strongest in the world, and even if the Rybka
> program were "ported" to Java, you would still
> lose on processing speed.
I am glad Zebediah is using his strong program to play with GetClub So
that I may find weakness in GetClubs game. I think with the
improvements you sugested the game will further continue +10. And
Zebediah will need 40-50 moves to win against the Advance Level.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 03 May 2008 12:04:42
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Zebediah win against the Advance Level, Please Analyze?
|
On May 3, 1:56 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> A week back Zebediah used to win in 20-30 moves but now the GetClubs
> game was a bit improved now Zebediah takes 35 moves to win against the
> Advance Level.
That was just one game; you can't draw sweeping
conclusions from the lengths of single games.
> If you can spot any mistake in GetClubs game I can improve it further.
>
> Please see the game and let me know which were the moves that were
> wrong.
The GetClub program neglects normal piece development
in favor of marauding Queen moves. This is a hallmark of
most weak /human/ players as well.
> Advance Level thinks for 30 min/ move So it is very difficult for me
> to find mistakes in Advance level game. Anyone having Commercial
> program please do the analysis and let me know which were the moves
> which were wrong by GetClub that Zebediah managed to win in just 34
> moves.
Rather than try to pinpoint specific moves, it may
help to simply point out that in this loss, just as in
many, many others, the program "forgot" to develop
its King-side pieces and castle. The result is that
much of the game if fought with just half its army.
> Remember Advance level plays better than Rybka So you must analyze for
> longer hours to give any good reasion.
Yes, the Advance level is probably around 3500--
3600 strength now. This is why the 3000-rated Rybka
program can only give it Knight or perhaps Rook
odds, and no more. With Queen odds I expect the
GetClub Advance level would /eventually/ prevail.
> I do not understand how zebediah manages to win Advance in just 35-40
> Moves?
Zeb is quite obviously using some other chess
program.
> After analyzing the game with Computer have you found any mistake in
> Advance Levels Game?
It doesn't require a computer to do that. One move
that was sub-optimal is 34. ...Qxc6. Generally
speaking, one should always avoid allowing one's
King to be captured for no reason.
> Is it making Tactical Mistakes or it is doing Strategy Mistake. Please
> Explain the mistake So that I really undersatand what went wrong.
Oh dear, that is a very tall order.
You need to coax the program into developing its
pieces and bringing its King to safety, instead of
chasing after spite-checks and wild tactical
skirmishes, the result of which is very unclear.
For instance, a while back you explained that the
reason it was losing via N-g5, Nxf7 suicide attacks
was that you gave a large bonus for spite-checks,
which of course was backfiring against decent
opponents (although it might work against weaker
ones).
I wouldn't worry too much about losing to Zeb's
chess program; for all we know, it could be one of
the strongest in the world, and even if the Rybka
program were "ported" to Java, you would still
lose on processing speed.
-- help bot
|
|
