|Feb-03-07|| ||positionalgenius: Very complicated game here...|
|Feb-03-07|| ||Dr.Lecter: Why not 34. Rxe7?|
|Feb-03-07|| ||KholdStare: 34. Rxe7?? Qb1+
35. Re1 Qxe1#
|Feb-03-07|| ||think: <Dr.Lecter> After 34. Rxe7?? Qb1+ leads to mate.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||lunacyfrog: <Dr. Lecter> Because after Rxe7??? Qb1+ and mate is forced.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||Honza Cervenka: 17.g3 was a move that really surprized me. For a human player it would be very difficult decision to do such a move. 17.Ra2 like in W Pasko vs Smith, 1997 looks more natural but in fact Shredder's 17.g3 with idea Nh4 can work too.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||Happypuppet: I'll agree with Honza. g3 looks like positional suicide by weakening the light squares near the king, but somehow Shredder made it work.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||Peligroso Patzer: 27. Bb7 (allowing the Bishop to be cut off by 27. ... c6) was a surprising move. Shredder obviously "trusted" the depth of its tactical analysis, and apparently rightly so. The sequence through 33. Re1 was prety forcing, so maybe a human GM would have played the same move. (Doing the calculations at move 27, it would not have been difficult, for example, to foresee that 29. … Qxe7 would allow 30. Bxc6.) Nevertheless, 27. Bxc6 came as a big surprise to me the first time I quickly went through the moves of this game.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||Themofro: Very nice and complicated game here.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||IMDONE4: computers arent afraid of moves like g3, especially against other computers who are unable to capitalize on many positional errors|
|Feb-03-07|| ||WBP: Question: How is the game formally ended? Does the computer (Ant) "recognize" that its position is hopeless, or do the computer's handlers throw in the towel?|
|Feb-03-07|| ||drkodos: Spectating computer vs computer is the nadir of chess.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||Timothy Glenn Forney: It's interesting that a shredder sets up tactics for a smothered mate threat after move 30,and the other engine did not calculate it.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||WickedPawn: < Honza Cervenka: 17.g3 was a move that really surprized me. For a human player it would be very difficult decision to do such a move. > I totally agree. I don't think that computer chess is doing any good for the evolution of chess. However, young players have been training with computer programs so their games are more agressive. At least, 'Morozevich-type' games, with all those positions impossible to figure out are more frequent.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||hbeck: < Glenn Forney: It's interesting that a shredder sets up tactics for a smothered mate threat after move 30,and the other engine did not calculate it.>
There is no smothered mate since the black knight on e7 will capture on g8 instead of the rook so the rook and queen both protect f7. However, black still is forced to play 31...Rxf7 because of the potential discovered check 32.Nd6+! winning the black queen.|
|Feb-03-07|| ||kevin86: What is the purpose of a computer vs computer game? Is it take make us mortals totally useless? lol|
White "engineers" a good attack and wins with it.
|Feb-03-07|| ||Mac3: There is allot of debate about the value of computer chess these days verses human etc.
The greatest computer known to man is still the grey matter between our two ears. It works on the quantum level and has the best processor, cooling unit, and memory storage all within a towerlike skull!
Computers are getting better and based on the use of algorithims are able to calculate much better than in the past.
If humans make full use of their G-d given software and hardware then computers will never defeat the most in tune player with the Almighty G-d through whom all things were created.
I use computers to help develop my pattern recognition capability, but not to rely upon then as they are still below the design capacity of the human brain.
The best computers in the world are owned by organisations such as the NSA and they operate at Qubut speed, which is faster than the 0 and 1 speed of what us "lesser" mortals get to operate with!
Shredder played a superior game here and we can all learn for it not matter what level of chess we are operating on!!!|
|Feb-04-07|| ||RandomVisitor: <WBP><Question: How is the game formally ended? Does the computer (Ant) "recognize" that its position is hopeless, or do the computer's handlers throw in the towel?>The machine is pre-programmed to resign when its evaluation score reaches a certain threshold, such as 9 points down, or when a mate in 4 is unavoidable, for example.|
|Feb-05-07|| ||Timothy Glenn Forney: <hbeck> I didn't say there was a smothered mate ,I said it was setting up the tactic and threat,creating the combination which won the rook and the game.At least that what it appears to be doing to me .|
|Feb-05-07|| ||Timothy Glenn Forney: 17.g3 just seems wrong,this game is fasinating to me.17.Re1 looks better to me anyway.|