< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Oct-27-05|| ||keypusher: <LMAJ><Open Defence> Astonishing game, thanks for pointer and analysis.|
|Oct-27-05|| ||dhotts: This game shows the beauty of chess. White hangs his rook and then discovers that he can put Black's king in the open with little defense by 23.R6xe6. Hail this as a great game or possibly one where desperation resulted in brilliance!|
|Oct-29-05|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <dhotts> I doubt it was desperation. |
"Z" is a player who loves to sacrifice. When he gets the kind of position that works for him ... on a good day, he cranks out combinations as beautiful as any I have ever seen.
Perhaps his only fault is that he tries too hard, not every game can be decided in this fashion. (Sometimes he sac's too much wood ... and pays the penalty.) I have also <occasionlly> seen him stuck in some very bad endings.
If you are interested, you can download "The Week In Chess" in your favorite format. I always take a look a Z's games ... win, lose or draw!
|Dec-21-05|| ||sharpnova: <life master aj>
as always.. and i mean ALWAYS... every post from you... EVERY post...
you are completely full of hot air..
yes the engines saw Raxe6 immediately.. i tested it on several mainstream engines including chessmaster, fritz, shredder, junior, and hiarcs.. they ALL saw the tactic immediately.. they considered no other move for even a fraction of a second..
aj.. you're a troll here... not a very clever one at that.. why chessgames allows you to keep posting... i have no clue..
|Jan-11-06|| ||EmperorAtahualpa: <BTW, after over five minutes, Fritz 8.0 does not have 23.R/a6xP/e6+ as its first or second choice. (If I remember correctly, Fritz liked 23.c4.)>|
<LIFE Master AJ> I am running a 10-year old computer with a 500Mhz P II-processor and 128MB RAM. On it I am using Crafty (version 19.19), and even THEN it could find 23.Raxe6+ under five minutes! (it took 2 minutes and 52 seconds)
Here is the complete output (after about 6 minutes of analyzing):
23.Raxe6+ fxe6 24.Rxe6+ Be7 25.Qe4 Rb8 26.Qe5 O-O 27.Bxe7 Nf4 28.Bxf8 Nxe6 29.Qxe6+ Kxf8 30.Ne5 Rd8=
(eval. -0.03; depth 14 ply; 150M nodes)
|Jan-11-06|| ||EmperorAtahualpa: <LIFE Master AJ> And by the way, this game is certainly not bad, but how could you consider this one of the three great games of the 21st century?? (as you put it in your Game Collection: LMAJ's "Great games of the 21st Century.")|
Also you wrote the following: <Several titled players wrote me about this game ...>. Should we take you serious?
|May-05-06|| ||LIFE Master AJ: I have a fairly decent computer.
Using FRITZ 9 (standard set-up); analyzing under the ChessBase interface, and allowing the box 350 MB of RAM, (Surely enough for any metal monster?) ... we give it two choices to examine. As soon as we hit "go" ... it is NOT looking at the capture on e6 on move 23. (It wants to examine Rd6 and Qe4.) 20-30 seonds later, still these same two moves. One full minute later, still these same two moves ...
We get up, walk around. Grab a bite to eat off a snack plate in the kitchen, stretch our legs. (At least five minutes later.) Now the boxes TOP choice is 23.c4. (A plus over/on top of a line, "+ 0.97.")
OK ... another five minutes later ... I drop it to one line, see if this does not help it to find the right move quicker. Right now it is STILL looking at 23.c4. Depth 17/17, 1,243 kN's. I will check it again in another five minutes.
Stay tuned ...
|May-05-06|| ||LIFE Master AJ: The 350 MB of RAM (Random Access Memory) ...was for the Hash Tables, natch. |
|May-05-06|| ||whatthefat: <sharpnova, LMAJ, etc.>
It's possible people are all using infinite analysis for the top n moves, but for different values of n. By increasing n, the analysis is slower, but it sometimes helps Fritz to find a line that it otherwise wouldn't. The reason being that it is forced to devote time to anything that might appear in the top n moves in the near future, so a larger n implies wider coverage of candidate moves. This could account for different results.|
|May-05-06|| ||LIFE Master AJ: V. Zvjaginsev - A. Shariyazdanov
click for larger view
Analysis by Fritz 9: 23.Raxe6+ fxe6 24.Rxe6+ Be7 25.Qe4 0-0-0 26.Bxe7 Nxe7 27.Qxb7+ Kxb7 28.Rxe7+ Kb6 29.Rxg7 a5 30.Rg5 a4 31.c4 bxc4 32.bxa4
± (1.07) Depth: 19/49 01:15:27 3808082kN (05.05.2006)
After OVER 90 minutes of analysis, (total) the computer has finally found the right move!
|May-05-06|| ||LIFE Master AJ: OK. I have a 3.2 GHz processor, and at least 2.5 GB of RAM, (total). During this test, I closed all unnecessary programs, only MSIE and ChessBase were running. |
I always use the ChessBase (8.0 to 9.0) interface. I have dozens of possible engine selections, some versions are very old, (like Fritz 5.32). Others, like Fritz 8, Fritz 9, Shredder, 9.0, Deep Junior are "state of the art." So the gentleman's criticism that the box finds the sack on e6 "RIGHT AWAY" does NOT hold water! (I repeated this test, also using "just" the FRITZ" interface, with similar results.)
We will assume that everyone out there has a fairly decent computer, even if this is not always true.
Here are the possibilities, as I see them:
A.) The person (or persons) in question did not set up the test correctly.
B.) The person (or persons) involved were not serious about what they said, but were jesting or speaking "tongue in cheek."
C.) The person (or persons) in question were intentionally deceiving us ... for reasons that we can only speculate about.
D.) The person (or persons) in question never performed any tests of any type ... and purposely gave false information ... in a blatant attempt to cast aspersion on this individual.
|May-05-06|| ||LIFE Master AJ: By the way, this is a very interesting game. I got an e-mail about it just this week.|
|May-05-06|| ||MrMojoRisin: Well, I just ran the position through Fritz on my computer. Sadly, my laptop which had 2GB RAM, died last month, so all I have is 500MB RAM on my new computer (with 2.66 GHz CPU).|
I gave Fritz 100MB RAM for the Hash Tables(I have a few other programs running at the moment which hog all the RAM). But even with a measly 100MB RAM, it found Rxe6 in exactly 14 seconds.
|May-05-06|| ||MrMojoRisin: Although it wasnt its number 1 choice. It thought that 23.c4 was a bit better than 23.Rxe6|
|May-05-06|| ||MrMojoRisin: Oh, and Crafty 19.01 found 23.Rxe6 in a millisecond.|
|May-05-06|| ||virginmind: just seen this game now. wow, how could black do 30...Qd5, so taking off the second defence for his knight in e7, when he saw that knight was attacked by three pieces and mate in two was obvious?! was it time trouble? almost any other move would have done better for him.|
|May-05-06|| ||MrMojoRisin: <This thread seems to demonstrate that a Life Master is only as good as his Fritz :) >|
LOL that is actually quite funny
|May-05-06|| ||AgentRgent: For what it's worth GnuChess 5.0 on my 1G pc plays Raxe6+ when given 20sec per move.|
|May-05-06|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <MrMojo>
Are you using Chessbase??? (7. 8, or 9.0?) You left a LOT of details out. (Not the way to contribute to a scientific discussion.)
|May-05-06|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <MrMojo> But in a way, you verified my findings. Emp. At CLAIMED that his computer found the sack on e6 instantly, you said it took 14 seconds. (That's a huge disparity, given the number of calculations that a modern computer executes in ONE SECOND.) |
|Aug-22-06|| ||Chess Lou Zer: Interesting puzzle after 27...g6!|
|Dec-06-06|| ||Whitehat1963: Beautiful finish!|
|Jan-04-09|| ||WhiteRook48: it seems like these higher rateds usually beat lower-rated because they're more skilled.
(Occasionally, the higher-rated blunders, but you can't expect it to happen.)|
|Jan-23-09|| ||WhiteRook48: ok, this game is just great!|
|Dec-16-10|| ||apexin: wow, Zvjaginstev seems to be a great tactician, looking at his best games.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·