|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 21 OF 21 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-01-06 | | chessmoron: Oh Kramnik draw this thing. By move 56...an one hour extra is on. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | dassy: Draw at last! |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | chessic eric: the next time control is move 56? not 60? |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Ybrevo: I am amazed that anyone find this kind of chess interesting. Not only this silly game right now, but the idea of Man versus Machine in general. What kind of benefit do we get out of it other than Fritz selling more programs to kill the fun? |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | chessmoron: <chessic eric>
<TIME CONTROL
In each game the Players shall each have to make 40 moves in two hours followed by 16 moves per hour thereafter...> |
|
Dec-01-06
 | | chessgames.com: Thanks to everybody for coming by today. The next game is Sunday morning at 9:00am (US/Eastern). See you then! |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | DeepThought: chessic eric: Yes, it always calculates the remaining amount of time (and even puts some spare time apart). During calculation, the main line is always maintained such that after each second it could take a short rest to check whether it's already time to output it's current best move. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Confuse: good game, that part in the middle where everyone said kramnik was dead was fantastic. see u guys on sunday. |
|
Dec-01-06
 | | Sneaky: The Petroff scores again! 1/2-1/2 |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Eyal: <Wild Bill: <Eyal: Fritz doesn't seem to understand it's a dead draw, despite the fact that it doesn't have any plan whatsoever to win. Pretty embarrassing.> Eyal, my friend, you seem to forget that Fritz doesn't understand anything and would never be embarrassed.> I meant embarrassing for the programmers, of course. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | JustAFish: We need a "Dancing Rook" animation to represent a draw... Two rooks shaking hands? A rook getting split down the middle? A rook doing the limbo. A rook shrugging its "shoulders?" |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | GEORGIE: JustAFish: We need a "Dancing Rook" animation to represent a draw... Two rooks shaking hands? A rook getting split down the middle? A rook doing the limbo. A rook shrugging its "shoulders?" Two rooks making out... |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Ulhumbrus: Instead of 22 Re4, 22 Rad1 improves the position of the piece placed worst, the R on a1 and is to be considered first. After being considered it may or may not be rejected. 24 g3 instead of 24 h3 places the pawns on Black squares. In any event, it makes Bxf7 following Re7 possible as the Bishop won't then need to come back to f1 in reply to a back rank check.However as 24..Ng7 keeps the Rs out of e8, this suggests 24 Re8+ Kg7 25 Rxh8 Kxh8 26 Re8+ Kg7 and only now 27 g3.Instead of 37 Rd4, 37 Re5 attacks the g5 pawn a second time, and on 37...f6 White would like to have his B on c4 to support Re6. This suggests 37 Bc4 preparing Re5 and then Re6 in reply to ..f6. My guess is that that this ending is won for White, but that White let the win slip at some point. Perhaps h3 and g4 reduce White's advantage, or some other choice does. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Marmot PFL: I wonder why the computer chose 8.Qh5 instead of c4 or Nc3. It looks rather crude and hasn't had good results in the games on this site. It would be interesting to see what variations it analysed to pick that move. Maybe it concluded that Qh4 had to be stopped. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | TheSlid: I thought that Kramnik was under some real pressure in this game. As a mere human, I did not like the black side much from moves 17 through to about 30. Vlad deserves a big applause for his defense in this phase of the game. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Eyal: <Marmot PFL: I wonder why the computer chose 8.Qh5 instead of c4 or Nc3.> I was wondering about that too, so I let my Fritz 10 analyze the position to a depth of 18-ply, and these are the main variations it came up with: 1. (0.43): 8.c4 c6 9.cxd5 cxd5 10.Qh5 g6 11.Qxd5 Bc6 12.Qb3 0-0 13.Nc3 Nxc3 14.bxc3 Re8 2. (0.41): 8.Qh5 Nf6 9.Re1+ Kf8 10.Qh4 Ne4 11.Qxd8+ Rxd8 12.Be3 Re8 13.f3 Nf6 14.Nd2 h5 15.Re2 3. (0.39): 8.Nc3 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Qh4 10.Re1+ Kf8 11.g3 Qg4 12.Be2 Qf5 13.c4 dxc4 14.Bxc4 Bc6 15.Bd3 Qf6 Basically, it shows that the differences in evaluation are microscopic, and can change with each ply (at 17-ply, for example, Qh5 was slightly higher). At that stage of the game Fritz was playing quickly by the "book" - so either the choice of move was more or less random, or at some stage of previous analysis Fritz decided that Qh5 was slightly better than the two other moves and was programmed to choose it at this stage. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | alicefujimori: Quite good play by DF, actually. It definitely had some advantage and some nice pressures in the middlegame. Noticable was 26.Bb5 provoking a pawn weakness first before retreating it to d3 attacking the knight and protecting the c-pawn at the same time. But I wonder why DF not prefer 36.f5 or 36.fxg5 first though before swapping rooks. After 39...gxf5 black probably equalized even when his knight was slightly inferior to DF's bishop. So a good performance by DF and some nice defence by Kramnik. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Victor G.: Game 4: Kramnik gives fritz too much time, wich at least gets rids of his castling after white's rook goes to e1 with check. He played 12...Ng5, trying to attack white's queen giving it little space to move(so far black still has the win). Then fritz plays 13. Qg4, which seems to even the situation in material after the queen exchange but it really gives black more time and development after 13...Qxg4 followed by 14. Ng4 0-0-0 (At this point black has the win). But instead Kramnik played 13...Qf4 and of course fritz goes for the queen exchange at f4 (14. Qxf4) (and with it the draw with good play) as it at least gets rid of Kramnik's castling and it also gives a check when black positions its rook on a good(but not enought to win) e1 square. At this point Kramnik winning chances are reduced to 0%(that is with good play of course), fritz winning chances are also reduced to 0%(that is with good play of course) and the drawing chances are increased to 100%(that is with good play of course). If black tried getting his queen out as in move 14 as in 14. Qe2, 14. Qd1 or even 14. Qg2 (with the purpose of avoiding a draw) these 3 would apparently worsen black's position, but of course it is really hard to tell. And also it is not clear if the machine calculated that 14. Qxf4 gives a draw(of course with good play) or it computed wrongly "a possible win for white"(which could seem like one after Re1+)but it is really an impossible win and a draw(of course with good play).
Another possibility could have been 12. Bg7 followed by 12...Qf3 f5 which also also would have given Kramnik the edge with good pawn positioning on the kingside and allowing castling on the queenside.
15...Ne6 possibly Kramnik's best move for this position (but only for a draw since his castling is now gone), since it threatens the g2 pawn after 16. Bxf4 Nxf4 Then of course 17. Rfe1+ followed by 17...Kf8(again Kramnik's best move on the given position, but only for a draw since it keeps the pressure on g2 so it does not allow 18. Na5(which would give white the edge). If black played 17...Nf6 (to still be able to castle) then 18.Na5 then white can try castling kingside 18...0-0 (this gives a stuck pawn for white on the c6 square), after 19. Nxc6 bxc6 or he can play 18...Bd5 followed by black playing 19. c4 which forces black to play 19...b6 then 20. cxd5 bxa5(this gives black a stuck pawn on the a5 square)(both of this are not good for black). When Kramnik played 13...Qf4 it gave this game a draw after 14. Qxf4 (of course with good play). If 13....Qxg4 would had been played then black had the most chances to win, since black's development would be much better than white's. |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Victor G.: when i said: "then 18.Na5 then white(i meant black) can try castling kingside 18...0-0" |
|
| Dec-01-06 | | Victor G.: also when I said: "(this gives a stuck pawn for white(i meant a stuck pawn for black) on the c6 square))" |
|
| Dec-02-06 | | Ulhumbrus: Kramnik appears to be better than Fritz in the ending. He got a won ending in game one, and in this game he succeeded in defending an ending that I believe is probably lost for Black with best play. On the other hand, compiling variations is Fritz's strength. The advice which this suggests for Kramnik is exactly the same as that after game two: Kramnik is advised to have confidence in his endgame ability - particularly where he has the better endgame- but to be more cautious before accepting the result of a calculated variation whose moves are not legally forced. |
|
| Dec-02-06 | | aazqua: What is Kramnik doing here? Complicated tactical opening leading to a bishop v knight, terrible development on the black side and a slow grind to equlity? Shouldn't he be aiming towards more quiet openings where he could secure a small long term positional advantage?? |
|
| Dec-02-06 | | NimzoKing: <What is Kramnik doing here? Complicated tactical opening leading to a bishop v knight, terrible development on the black side and a slow grind to equlity? Shouldn't he be aiming towards more quiet openings where he could secure a small long term positional advantage??> I don't think anyone can hope for a slow positional, long term advantage when playing black. |
|
| Dec-02-06 | | Ulhumbrus: Kramnik appears to possess greater mastery of the endgame than Fritz possesses. He got a won ending in game one, and in this game he succeeded in defending an ending that I believe is probably lost for Black with best play. On the other hand, compiling variations is Fritz's strength. The advice which this suggests for Kramnik is exactly the same as that after game two: Kramnik is advised to have confidence in his endgame ability - particularly where he has the better endgame- but to be more cautious before accepting the result of a calculated middle game variation whose moves are not legally forced. |
|
| Dec-02-06 | | notyetagm: <Ulhumbrus: Kramnik appears to possess greater mastery of the endgame than Fritz possesses.> Yes, the endgame is not the strongest point of the chess engines. Calculation is their bread and butter, as you pointed out. I would like to see Deep Fritz play a Benoni as Black, or some other opening in which Kramnik cannot trade the queens. Kramnik has -twice- now made ??-type blunders in endgames involving queens and knights, once in his 2002 match and again here in this match. I think it is not a coincidence that Kramnik's blunders have come with the two most tactical pieces, queens and knights, remaining on the board. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 21 OF 21 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
