< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Apr-01-05|| ||acdc: WOW!! wat an endgame by karpov! |
|May-16-05|| ||Backward Development: Incredible endgame, very instructive. Karpov's disdain of material is very well done, especially against the number-crunching computer.|
|May-16-05|| ||WorldChampeen: Karpov wrote the book on the Caro Kann!|
|May-17-05|| ||RookFile: Got me thinking.... I think Capablanca was the first great player to use it, but of course, he didn't write a book about it.|
|May-18-05|| ||woodenbishop: Very impressive (though typical) end game by Karpov.|
|Mar-21-06|| ||64 Squares: This game looks like a game of Deep Thought. Im almost sure of it but I'll check.|
|Mar-21-06|| ||kansasofunitedstates: The computer should not have moved the horse on play 11! The horse cannot be protected! |
The computer did not "look for the check-mate" on move 16! The game was certainly over!
|Mar-21-06|| ||goldenbear: Karpov sure knows what "winning" means. Karpov -- possibly the reincarnation of Pillsbury?|
|Mar-21-06|| ||tamar: Computer, know your classics! The machine hadn't been briefed on moves 35-38 of Capablanca vs Tartakower, 1924|
Karpov probably saw the winning pattern with Kg5 instantly when he offered the a pawn.
|Mar-16-07|| ||argishti: karpov crushed the machine! wat a crushing game!|
|Mar-17-07|| ||themanfrommanila: Very few players could beat Karpov in an endgame.|
|Mar-17-07|| ||RookFile: <argishti: karpov crushed the machine! wat a crushing game!>|
Actually, he didn't. If memory serves, the published accounts of this game say that the computer could have forced a draw about move 38 by repetition. The computer thought it was better, and played for the win.
Looking at the game, I guess what this means is 38..... Rb3+ 39. Kf4 Rb4
and the question is, try to find a better move than 40. Ke3.
|Mar-17-07|| ||chessamateur: <64 Squares> This is a game of Deep Thought's. It was G/60 played on Feb. 2, 1990.|
Source: How Computers Play Chess David Levy, Monty Newborn
|Aug-14-08|| ||CapablancaFan: Wow, Karpov plays this endgame with razor sharp Capablanca-like precision.|
|Aug-27-08|| ||newton296: I just had to see how karpov would play against a computer . |
same old karpov! lol! looks like he isn't doing much but waiting for a mistake and wham ! he gets it and wins the endgame .
|Aug-27-08|| ||newton296: newton296:
I just had to see how karpov would play against a computer .
same old karpov! lol!
looks like he isn't doing much more then waiting for a mistake. then wham ! he gets the computer to error , and wins the endgame easy.
|Aug-27-08|| ||sicilianhugefun: another endgame masterpiece from the king of endgame himself|
|Jan-23-09|| ||rwbean: On the Computer Chess Club on 17 June 2003 I wrote:
"Surprisingly, by move 16 Deep Thought had a chance to make a sacrifice that
would have placed Anatoly under tremendous pressure. Had the game been played
with a regular time control, then Deep Thought would have made the sacrifice.
The 3-workstation version of the program that played Garry potentially could
find the sacrifice within the game time, assuming that we had got it working for
the match. It is amazing how a minor difference could have changed the history
Since Deep Thought could not find the sacrifice over the board, it played the
second best move and Anatoly obtained a slight edge."
"Behind Deep Blue", pp120-1
After an 18 ply search, Ruffian 1.0.1 (P4 2.4Ghz, 256Mb hash) and Crafty 19.3
(Dual Athlon MP 2000+, 768Mb hash) both like 16...Nf5. Are they missing
something, or is there a mistake in the book?
*end of quote*
It's 2009 now, and Rybka 3 still can't see anything better than 16 ... Nf5 (+0.12 after 17 ply search). Am I even looking at the right move?
(PS The endgame has many mistakes from both sides... eg 56 Ke5 wins, or 55 ... a3 or 59 ... h3 draws).
|Feb-24-09|| ||WhiteRook48: is Computer a Computer?|
|Sep-09-09|| ||WhiteRook48: where's the repetition?|
|May-28-12|| ||maxi: Possibly it's my lack of chess understanding talking, but I don't care for Karpov's opening play.|
|May-28-12|| ||Call Me TC: Karpov was smart enough to take on the best computer when it could still be beaten.|
|May-28-12|| ||Eduardo Leon: The beautiful pawn sacrifice <51.h5 gxh5+ 52.♔f5> (when already a pawn down!) reminded me of Capablanca vs Tartakower, 1924|
|May-28-12|| ||RandomVisitor: After 16...Nf5 the position is complicated, even for a computer:|
click for larger view
Rybka 4.1 x64:
[-0.07] d=21 17.Re1 Kh8 18.Nd7 Qxb2 19.Nxf8 Rxf8 20.Rc1 e6 21.Nd2 Bxg2+ 22.Kxg2 h6 23.Qb3 Qxb3 24.Nxb3 hxg5 25.Rb1 Rf7 26.Bb5 Ncxd4 27.Nxd4 Nxd4 28.Be8 Rc7 29.Bxg6 Bf8 30.Bd3 Bb4 31.Re3 Bd2 32.Rh3+
|Dec-15-12|| ||rwbean: Houdini 1.5a after about an hour thinks 16...Nf5 is the best move, equal (16...Qxb2 is about +0.5 for White).|
27/67 1:08:10 14,858,543,322 3,632,000 0.00 Nh6-f5 Ra1-c1 h7-h6 Bg5-f4 g6-g5 Bf4-d2 Nc6xd4 Nc5xe4 d5xe4 Nf3xd4 Nf5xd4 Be2-c4+ Kg8-h8 Rf1-e1 Ra8-d8 Re1xe4 Nd4-c6 Qd1-e1 Qb6xb2 Re4-e2 Qb2-a3 Rc1-a1 Qa3-c5 Ra1-c1 Qc5-a3 Rc1-a1
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·