game against chesterfield

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Aaron at 25 March 2000 17:05:07:
I tried a quick 5 0 blitz game against Chessterfieldcl, to my surprise I won..

[White "Aaron"]
[Black "chessterfieldcl"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3
Nxe4 8. O-O Bxc3 9. d5 Bf6 10. Re1 O-O
It's quite interesting how chessterfield manages book moves despite not having a opening book..But for I know these moves are easy to find..But it could also have something to do with the "neural nets" whatever..

11. Rxe4
Okay I'm out of book now..
Na5 12. Bd3 b6 13. Rb1 h5
while I'm sure, I'm playing second rate moves, Chestefield's 13..h5 really puzzles me..
14. b4 Nb7 15. Bb2 c6 16. Bxf6 Qxf6 17. Bc4 Nd6
At this point, the program was happy..+2.0 ..

18. Rh4 g5 19. Nxg5!
I can't say that I had planned this long before, but it looked right..Anyway what choice did I have?

19.. Qxg5
20. Rxh5 Qf4 21. Bd3 cxd5 22. g3 Qf6 23. Qg4+ Qg7 24. Rg5 Ne8 25. Re1 f6
26. Rxg7+ Nxg7 27. Qg6 f5 28. Re7 Rf7 29. Qxf7+ Kh7 30. Qxg7#
{White mates} 1-0
I could be just lucky, but it seems to me that Chessterfield is not one of the better programs, maybe 1 crown or 2...

I'm a very weak player probably lower than 1600ish so I expect some of the people here will probably slaughter it..

[Sune Larsson]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Sune Larsson at 25 March 2000 17:34:01:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: game against chesterfield geschrieben von: / posted by: Aaron at 25 March 2000 17:05:07:

I tried a quick 5 0 blitz game against Chessterfieldcl, to my surprise I won..

[White "Aaron"]
[Black "chessterfieldcl"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3
Nxe4 8. O-O Bxc3 9. d5 Bf6 10. Re1 O-O
It's quite interesting how chessterfield manages book moves despite not having a opening book..But for I know these moves are easy to find..But it could also have something to do with the "neural nets" whatever..

11. Rxe4
Okay I'm out of book now..
Na5 12. Bd3 b6 13. Rb1 h5
while I'm sure, I'm playing second rate moves, Chestefield's 13..h5 really puzzles me..
14. b4 Nb7 15. Bb2 c6 16. Bxf6 Qxf6 17. Bc4 Nd6
At this point, the program was happy..+2.0 ..

18. Rh4 g5 19. Nxg5!
I can't say that I had planned this long before, but it looked right..Anyway what choice did I have?

19.. Qxg5
20. Rxh5 Qf4 21. Bd3 cxd5 22. g3 Qf6 23. Qg4+ Qg7 24. Rg5 Ne8 25. Re1 f6
26. Rxg7+ Nxg7 27. Qg6 f5 28. Re7 Rf7 29. Qxf7+ Kh7 30. Qxg7#
{White mates} 1-0
I could be just lucky, but it seems to me that Chessterfield is not one of the better programs, maybe 1 crown or 2...

I'm a very weak player probably lower than 1600ish so I expect some of the people here will probably slaughter it..

No need to slaughter it. Think it was a good piece of blitz! Keep it up
and just pick them one by one! 13.-h5 was a "out of chess" move. Pure maniac...
Thanks

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 25 March 2000 23:50:45:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: game against chesterfield geschrieben von: / posted by: Aaron at 25 March 2000 17:05:07:

I tried a quick 5 0 blitz game against Chessterfieldcl, to my surprise I won..

[White "Aaron"]
[Black "chessterfieldcl"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3
Nxe4 8. O-O Bxc3 9. d5 Bf6 10. Re1 O-O
It's quite interesting how chessterfield manages book moves despite not having a opening book..But for I know these moves are easy to find..But it could also have something to do with the "neural nets" whatever..

11. Rxe4
Okay I'm out of book now..
Na5 12. Bd3 b6 13. Rb1 h5
while I'm sure, I'm playing second rate moves, Chestefield's 13..h5 really puzzles me..
14. b4 Nb7 15. Bb2 c6 16. Bxf6 Qxf6 17. Bc4 Nd6
At this point, the program was happy..+2.0 ..

18. Rh4 g5 19. Nxg5!
I can't say that I had planned this long before, but it looked right..Anyway what choice did I have?

19.. Qxg5
20. Rxh5 Qf4 21. Bd3 cxd5 22. g3 Qf6 23. Qg4+ Qg7 24. Rg5 Ne8 25. Re1 f6
26. Rxg7+ Nxg7 27. Qg6 f5 28. Re7 Rf7 29. Qxf7+ Kh7 30. Qxg7#
{White mates} 1-0
I could be just lucky, but it seems to me that Chessterfield is not one of the better programs, maybe 1 crown or 2...

I'm a very weak player probably lower than 1600ish so I expect some of the people here will probably slaughter it..

If you turned "Show thinking" off it might be an even bigger achievement ).
Best wishes...
Mogens

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Aaron at 26 March 2000 05:19:37:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: game against chesterfield geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 25 March 2000 23:50:45:

I tried a quick 5 0 blitz game against Chessterfieldcl, to my surprise I won..

[White "Aaron"]
[Black "chessterfieldcl"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3
Nxe4 8. O-O Bxc3 9. d5 Bf6 10. Re1 O-O
It's quite interesting how chessterfield manages book moves despite not having a opening book..But for I know these moves are easy to find..But it could also have something to do with the "neural nets" whatever..

11. Rxe4
Okay I'm out of book now..
Na5 12. Bd3 b6 13. Rb1 h5
while I'm sure, I'm playing second rate moves, Chestefield's 13..h5 really puzzles me..
14. b4 Nb7 15. Bb2 c6 16. Bxf6 Qxf6 17. Bc4 Nd6
At this point, the program was happy..+2.0 ..

18. Rh4 g5 19. Nxg5!
I can't say that I had planned this long before, but it looked right..Anyway what choice did I have?

19.. Qxg5
20. Rxh5 Qf4 21. Bd3 cxd5 22. g3 Qf6 23. Qg4+ Qg7 24. Rg5 Ne8 25. Re1 f6
26. Rxg7+ Nxg7 27. Qg6 f5 28. Re7 Rf7 29. Qxf7+ Kh7 30. Qxg7#
{White mates} 1-0
I could be just lucky, but it seems to me that Chessterfield is not one of the better programs, maybe 1 crown or 2...

I'm a very weak player probably lower than 1600ish so I expect some of the people here will probably slaughter it..

If you turned "Show thinking" off it might be an even bigger achievement ).
Best wishes...
Mogens

Well thinking was on as usual..But it you meant to imply that I gained from being able to read my opponents "thoughts" well, i can say honestly, I did not...Under Blitz conditions, I cant spare the time to glance at the lines considered best by the program without seriously disrupting my thoughts..
But that's a good point..I will turn thinking off next time

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 26 March 2000 15:57:07:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: game against chesterfield geschrieben von: / posted by: Aaron at 26 March 2000 05:19:37:

Well thinking was on as usual..But it you meant to imply that I gained from being able to read my opponents "thoughts" well, i can say honestly, I did not...Under Blitz conditions, I cant spare the time to glance at the lines considered best by the program without seriously disrupting my thoughts..

I didn't imply that, but you mentioned the programs evaluation score, which could be misunderstood by a few untrusting individuals. If you remember to turn ponder on and show thinking off then noone can put a finger on your performance.
Best wishes...
Mogens

[Lyapko George]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Lyapko George at 27 March 2000 08:25:44:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: game against chesterfield geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 26 March 2000 15:57:07:

Well thinking was on as usual..But it you meant to imply that I gained from being able to read my opponents "thoughts" well, i can say honestly, I did not...Under Blitz conditions, I cant spare the time to glance at the lines considered best by the program without seriously disrupting my thoughts..

I didn't imply that, but you mentioned the programs evaluation score, which could be misunderstood by a few untrusting individuals. If you remember to turn ponder on and show thinking off then noone can put a finger on your performance.
Best wishes...
Mogens

In many cases position evaluation of chess programs means nothing. Here is a brief example (my latest 5' blitz against SOS, which is, as you know, very strong chess engine):
[Site "LYAPKO"]
[Date "2000.03.25"]
[Round "-"]
[White "George"]
[Black "SOS"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300"]
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 Qxe5
8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. d4 Qxd4+ 10. Be3 Qf6 11. Bxf4 Ne7 12. Nc3 Nf5 13. Nd5 Bc5+
14. Kh1 Qxb2 15. Qh5+ Kg8 16. Qxf5 Na6 17. Be5 Bf2 18. Ne7#
{White mates} 1-0
After 12... Nf5 SOS shows +3.21, but even after 14... Qxb2? ,when a game was already lost by black, SOS evaluate his position as +1.26...
Best wishes,
George

George Lyapko's Home Page

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 March 2000 15:20:45:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: game against chesterfield geschrieben von: / posted by: Lyapko George at 27 March 2000 08:25:44:

In many cases position evaluation of chess programs means nothing. Here is a brief example (my latest 5' blitz against SOS, which is, as you know, very strong chess engine):
[Site "LYAPKO"]
[Date "2000.03.25"]
[Round "-"]
[White "George"]
[Black "SOS"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300"]
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 Qxe5
8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. d4 Qxd4+ 10. Be3 Qf6 11. Bxf4 Ne7 12. Nc3 Nf5 13. Nd5 Bc5+
14. Kh1 Qxb2 15. Qh5+ Kg8 16. Qxf5 Na6 17. Be5 Bf2 18. Ne7#
{White mates} 1-0
After 12... Nf5 SOS shows +3.21, but even after 14... Qxb2? ,when a game was already lost by black, SOS evaluate his position as +1.26...
Best wishes,
George

If you can see the evaluation, you can also follow the programs thinking, which is a significant advantage, which is the only reason for my objection.
Best wishes...
Mogens

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Aaron at 27 March 2000 18:07:14:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: game against chesterfield geschrieben von: / posted by: Mogens Larsen at 27 March 2000 15:20:45:

In many cases position evaluation of chess programs means nothing. Here is a brief example (my latest 5' blitz against SOS, which is, as you know, very strong chess engine):
[Site "LYAPKO"]
[Date "2000.03.25"]
[Round "-"]
[White "George"]
[Black "SOS"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300"]
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 g4 5. O-O gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 Qxe5
8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. d4 Qxd4+ 10. Be3 Qf6 11. Bxf4 Ne7 12. Nc3 Nf5 13. Nd5 Bc5+
14. Kh1 Qxb2 15. Qh5+ Kg8 16. Qxf5 Na6 17. Be5 Bf2 18. Ne7#
{White mates} 1-0
After 12... Nf5 SOS shows +3.21, but even after 14... Qxb2? ,when a game was >>already lost by black, SOS evaluate his position as +1.26...
Best wishes,
George

If you can see the evaluation, you can also follow the programs thinking, >which is a significant advantage, which is the only reason for my objection.

Wow, you really thrashed the program..Looks like most programs just can't properly handle gambits like the Muzio in short time limits where their evaluation is too shallow..
As I see it, we are talking about 2 things..Seeing the evalution score and the best line proposed..
In my Blitz game, I occasionally glanced at the first,while this gave me some advantage it wasn;t as big as it seems, since I did't fully trust the computer,otherwise I would have given up when the computer's score read +2.0 for itself..
On the other hand, being able to read the whole computer evaluation line may be a big advantage, espically if you manage to reach a position from the opening where the computer evaluates as winning or very good for you..Generally all you have to do is to follow the best lines proposed by the program and it loses quickly.
For some reason, programs find it difficult to refrute their own analysis. I suppose this applies to Humans as well..Except that Humans would be even more demoralised when they found their opponent moving the "best" (in thier view) winning sequences ..
I used to do this, when playing Chessmaster 6000( I had no chance anyway) with thinking windows on when playing long games, as I was usually bored stiff while waiting for the computer to move...
I suppose, if Kasparov played against a mind reader, it would be similar, to the case above..