|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 24 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-18-06 | | AbhinavAsthana: Hi! First of all, Thanks for clearing my doubts in many of the games in the past. I am happy that you have started your chesssforum. |
|
Nov-27-06
 | | Sneaky: Hi Honza, you've been awfully quiet regarding Chessgames Challenge: Team White vs Team Black, 2006. You haven't forgotten about it have you? Or are you just sitting back until we reach an important crossroads? We're all eager to hear your opinions! |
|
Nov-28-06
 | | Honza Cervenka: <Sneaky> I have not forgotten but I was short of time last few days (I am just moving my house) and so I missed the voting for the second move (nevertheless 2.d4 would be my vote and so I am quite satisfied with it). |
|
Nov-28-06
| | Sneaky: Glad to hear it! Good luck with your move. |
|
Nov-29-06
 | | Domdaniel: Hi, Honza.
Just a comment on something you said near the end of today's (3rd) Kramnik-Fritz game. You said this:
<the machine really doesn't understand it and that is why it gets sometimes the whole picture absolutely wrong.>I agree. It still amazes me how some people don't understand that this factor makes *all* engine evaluations dubious. It's not just 'rare endings' - the fact that engine calculations can be based on a gross positional error is enough to throw everything in doubt. Therefore, engine lines must be checked, move by move... Sorry. I've spent too much time explaining this to people in the Nickel game - both the ones who think we follow computers, and the ones who want us to. If you want to get back into the analysis of that game, by the way, please do -- it's an interesting position right now, which could get very sharp soon... thank you.
|
|
Dec-02-06
| | Honza Cervenka: <Domdaniel> Problem with comp's evaluations is that they are made mechanically by calculating of "value" of many separate positional factors by course of some general algorithm. This is not necessarily bad and I think it is very useful if a man tries to analyze a position with help of a good engine. But it has its limits and human's intuition or ability to synthesize separate aspects of position is still above todays comp's possibilities. This is why man+comp pair is usually much better player than comp alone as Arno had shown againt Hydra. |
|
| Dec-02-06 | | Open Defence: i guess going "Centaur" avoids the human blunder at the same time the human can evaluate the dynamics... |
|
| Dec-13-06 | | Eyal: <Honza Cervenka> In my forum, I see you have been focusing your efforts on the line 38.Rb3 Kf6 39.Rb6 Ke6 40.Kg3 Ra8. Do you think that, taking an overview of the analysis done so far, it's fair to say that's the critical line (i.e., the one which gives black best chances of resistance)? |
|
Dec-13-06
| | Honza Cervenka: <Eyal> The other lines were heavily analysed already but I had not time to check everything posted (and now burried on previous pages) of main page or/and some forums. Try ask RookFile, KnightLunatic, djmercury and other kibitzers involved in those discussions and analyses to repost what was already done in this matter. |
|
| Dec-13-06 | | Eyal: <Honza> Thanks. The question arose because I went over the analyses myself, and was considering if it's a good idea to post a message on the main page about that (encouraging people to concentrate on this line if they're looking at the rook ending). |
|
Dec-15-06
 | | cu8sfan: Congratulations on your Caissar! Best analyst, this is certainly a category I will never excel in. |
|
| Dec-15-06 | | dakgootje: Gratz on your caissar! =) |
|
| Dec-15-06 | | Benzol: Congratulations <Honza>. Your award was well deserved. |
|
| Dec-15-06 | | Eyal: <Honza> Congrats on the Caissar! <[I've already posted the following on the main page, just re-posting in case you missed that]:> Regarding the ending you're discussing with <KnightLunatic>, I'm curious as to what you think about the analysis posted by <RookFile> in my forum, with 45.a7 instead of 45.b5. |
|
Dec-15-06
 | | WannaBe: Much congrats on your 2006 Caissar! |
|
| Dec-17-06 | | Eyal: <Comps are great in middlegame fog, wild tactics and dynamic positions but long-term crystal-clear ideas and conceptions in relatively simple but not yet tablebase positions in endgames are their great weak spot> Apparently that was the basis of Kramnik's strategy in the recent match against Fritz 10 - what was your overall impression regarding Fritz's endgame play? |
|
Dec-18-06
| | Honza Cervenka: <Eyal: <Comps are great in middlegame fog, wild tactics and dynamic positions but long-term crystal-clear ideas and conceptions in relatively simple but not yet tablebase positions in endgames are their great weak spot> Apparently that was the basis of Kramnik's strategy in the recent match against Fritz 10 - what was your overall impression regarding Fritz's endgame play?> I was not much impressed by Fritz 10's play. In game one he carelessly allowed Kramnik to get clearly superior ending which Volodya unfortunately blew up by several inaccuracies. In game three he missed quite simple tactical "fortress" trick. In game four Kramnik had also no significant troubles to keep an inferior position by creating an impenetrable wall in N vs B ending. Games five and especially six have demonstrated Fritz 10's strenght but not in endings. |
|
| Dec-24-06 | | chesstoplay: Merry Christmas! |
|
| Jan-01-07 | | AbhinavAsthana: ♖♘♗ Happy New year 2007!!! ♗♘♖
|
|
| Jan-07-07 | | Eyal: Hello, <Honza>. I hope it won't be rude to inquire if you lost interest in the game against team black? If not, we could certainly benefit from your judgment and advice... |
|
| Jan-13-07 | | Eyal: <Honza> As you may have noticed, there was an argument in main Shulman page about the soundness of the Albin Counter Gambit, and several of your correspondence games were mentioned in this context, so I'm wondering - in case 1...d5 is elected, would you be in favour of playing this gambit? |
|
Jan-15-07
| | Honza Cervenka: <Eyal> Albin is quite interesting opening which produces quite often highly "irrational" positions with chances for both sides but with appearence of really strong engines it has lost great part of its former appeal in CC game format. I think it is still playable but black has also more solid and promising ways to fight for activity from the opening. |
|
| Jan-21-07 | | Artar1: Honza:
I have been doing some work with the Albin Counter-Gambit. Do you have any comments concerning these lines? Thanks. You can post on my forum if you wish and delete this entry whenever you like if you find that convenient. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.a3 (4.Nf3 is commonplace.) 4...Nc6 5.e3 <(At 19-ply, Deep Fritz 10 likes 5...Nge7. But Chris Ward (English grandmaster) suggests 5...Be6.)> A. 5...Be6 6.Nf3 dxe3 7.Qxd8+ Rxd8 8.Bxe3 Nge7 (White is a pawn up but Black has a lead in development.) 9.Nc3 a6 (Prevents Nb5.) 10.Ng5 Nxe5 11.Nxe6 fxe6 12.Rd1 Rxd1+ 13.Nxd1 N7c6 14.f4 Ng4 15.Bg1 e5 16.Be2 Nf6 17.fxe5 Nxe5 18.Bd4 Nc6 19.Be3 Bd6 20.Bf3 Kd7 21.c5 Be5 22.b4 Re8 23.Kd2 <(Black played 23...Ne7 (E. Agrest-B.Glenne, 2001) and went on to lose, but we're not going to do that here. The rest is from Deep Fritz 10, 20-ply.)> 23...Kc8 24.Bxc6 bxc6 25.Kd3 Kb7 26.h3 a5 27.bxa5 Ka6 28.Re1 Kxa5 29.Bd4 Bxd4 30.Rxe8 Nxe8 31.Kxd4 = B. 5...dxe3 (This move is played often.) 6.Qxd8+ Kxd8 7.Bxe3 Nxe5 8.Nf3!? B1. 8...Bd6 9.Nc3 Bg4 10.0–0–0 Nxf3 11.h3 Bd7 12.gxf3 Nf6 13.Rg1 Rg8 (The Black king seems to be a liability in the center.) <(13...g6? 14.Rxd6! 14...cxd6 15.Bg5 Black loses two pieces for a rook.)> 14.Bg5 Be7 15.Bd3 Ke8 (Hsu Li Yang-E.Handoko, 1997) 16.Bxf6!? 16...Bxf6 17.Nd5 (Would be winning for White according to Chris Ward.) B2. 8...Nxf3+ 9.gxf3 (White's kingside pawn structure has been compromised.) 9...Be7 <[Deep Fritz 10: 9...Ne7 10.Nc3 Be6 11.0–0–0+ Kc8 12.Nb5 a6 13.Nd4 Bd7 14.Rg1 g6 15.Bg5 Nc6 16.Nxc6 bxc6 17.Bd3 Bd6 =, 21-ply;Deep Fritz 10: 9...Be6 10.Nc3 Kc8 11.0–0–0 Ne7 12.Nb5 a6 13.Nd4 Bd7 14.Rg1 g6 15.Bg5 Nc6 16.Nxc6 bxc6 17.Bd3 Bd6 =, 21-ply]> 10.Nc3 c6 11.0–0–0+ Ke8 12.Bd3 f5 13.Rhe1 Kf7 14.Ne2 Bf6 15.Nf4 <(White seems to enjoy piece activity in compensation for kingside pawn damage.)> 15...Ne7 16.c5! 16...g6 (Black's play is passive.) 17.Bc4+ Kg7 18.Bd4! 18...Re8 19.Bxf6+ Kxf6 20.Rd6+ Kg7 21.Ne6+ Bxe6 22.Rdxe6 Kf7 23.Rxe7+ 1–0 (S.Jasny-J.Lukac, 1999) |
|
| Jan-22-07 | | positionalgenius: <Honza>Hey.I have a question for you.Would you consider these ratings to be respectable:
blitz-1538
bullet-1520
classical-1700
Just wondering.Thanks in advance. |
|
| Jan-22-07 | | Artar1: positionalgenius:
I'm not Honza, but yes those are good numbers. Keep up the good work. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 24 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
