According to www.chessbase.com .GM Kavalek in his Huffington post columnn makes the comment that Computer Engines could not come up quickly with Carlsen's Bishop sacrifice : Lets See:
[fen]2r1k2r/2q2pp1/2n1p3/1p1pP1BB/n1pP4/2P3P1/1P3PK1/R2Q3R [/fen]
Fritz 11 takes 1 hour 25 minutes on my Dual Core 2 GIG:
80: Carlsen,M - Wang Hao, 73rd Tata Steel GMA 2011
2r1k2r/2q2pp1/2n1p3/1p1pP1BB/n1pP4/2P3P1/1P3PK1/R2Q3R w k - 0 1
Analysis by Fritz 11:
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Ra8 26.Qh7 Ne7 27.Bh5 Qb6 28.Qc2
+- (2.44) Depth: 9/22 00:00:00 114kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Ra8 26.b3 cxb3 27.Qxb3 Ra7 28.Be2 f6 29.exf6 gxf6
+- (2.50) Depth: 10/28 00:00:00 221kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Qd7 26.Be2 Ra8 27.Bf3 Ne7 28.b3 cxb3 29.Qxb3 Nf5
+- (2.41) Depth: 11/27 00:00:00 421kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Qd7 26.Rh7 Ra8 27.b3 cxb3 28.Qxb3 Ra5 29.Qc2 Ra8 30.Bf3
+- (2.45) Depth: 12/27 00:00:00 810kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Ne7 26.Rh7 Ra8 27.b3 cxb3 28.Qxb3 Qc4 29.Qc2 Kd7 30.Be2 Qxc3 31.Bxb5+
+- (2.52) Depth: 13/29 00:00:01 1968kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Ne7 26.Rh7 Ra8 27.Be2 Ra5 28.Rah1 Nf5 29.Bg4 Nh6 30.Bxe6 fxe6 31.Bxh6
+- (2.50) Depth: 14/34 00:00:03 4427kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Ne7 26.Be2 Qb7 27.Rh7 Nf5 28.Rah1 Ra8 29.Bg4 b4 30.Rh8 Ne7 31.Qh7
+- (2.45) Depth: 15/31 00:00:05 8017kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Kd7 26.b3 Nb6 27.b4 Rh8 28.Rh7 Rcg8 29.Rah1 Qb8 30.Qb1 Na4 31.Qc2 Rxh7 32.Rxh7
+- (2.38) Depth: 16/37 00:00:15 22449kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Kd7 26.b3 Nb6 27.b4 Rh8 28.Rh7 Rcg8 29.Rah1 Qb8 30.Qd2 Rxh7 31.Rxh7 Qc7 32.Qf4 Kc8
+- (2.34) Depth: 17/39 00:00:39 55817kN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qc2 Kd7 26.Rh7 Ra8 27.Bh5 Ke8 28.Ra2 Ra6 29.Bf3 b4 30.Rh1 b3 31.Qh7 Rf8
+- (2.31) Depth: 18/39 00:01:21 123mN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Ra2 Ra8 26.b3 cxb3 27.Qxb3 Ra5 28.Raa1 Rf8 29.Qa3 Rg8 30.Qc1 Ra8 31.Be2 Ra5 32.Bd3
+- (2.34) Depth: 19/38 00:02:39 251mN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Ra2 Ra8 26.b3 cxb3 27.Qxb3 Ra5 28.Raa1 Rf8 29.Be2 Kd7 30.Bf3 Ke8 31.Bg4 Qb7 32.Be3 Qa6 33.Be2 f6 34.Bh5+
+- (2.37) Depth: 20/41 00:04:13 405mN
24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Ra2 Ne7 26.Qc2 Qb7 27.Qh7 Ra8 28.Be2 Kf8 29.Qc2 Nf5 30.Rh7 Ke8 31.Bg4 Ne7 32.Ra1 Nc6 33.Rh4 Kd7 34.Ra2 Ne7
+- (2.31) Depth: 21/44 00:19:47 1949mN
24.Qe2 Rg8 25.Qc2 Ne7 26.Bg4 Ra8 27.Rh7 Kd7 28.Ra3 Ke8 29.Bf3 Ra6 30.Ra1
+- (2.33) Depth: 21/45 00:28:08 2763mN
24.Qe2 Qd7 25.Bf3 Rg8 26.Qc2 Ne7 27.Rh7 Qc6 28.Be2 Ra8 29.Bg4 Kd7 30.Rc1 Ke8
+- (2.37) Depth: 22/47 00:44:15 4372mN
24.Qe2 Qd7 25.Qc2 Qb7 26.Bg4 Rg8 27.Rh4 Ne7 28.Rh7 Qc6 29.Bd2 Ra8 30.Rah1 Kd7 31.Bg5 Ke8 32.Bd2
+- (2.37) Depth: 23/46 01:13:26 7149mN
24.Bxf7+ Kxf7 25.Qf3+ Kg8 26.Rxh8+ Kxh8 27.Rh1+ Kg8 28.Qh5 Nxe5 29.Bf4 Rf8 30.Qh7+ Kf7 31.Bxe5 Qe7 32.Bxg7 Ke8 33.Bxf8
+- (3.49) Depth: 23/47 01:25:27 8437mN
24.Bxf7+ Qxf7 25.Rxh8+ Kd7 26.Rxc8 Kxc8 27.Qc2 Kb7 28.b3 cxb3 29.Qxb3 Ka6 30.Qa3 Kb6 31.Qd6 Qe8 32.Rb1 Qc8 33.Qa3
+- (4.29) Depth: 24/47 01:31:33 9127mN
24.Bxf7+ Qxf7 25.Rxh8+ Kd7 26.Rxc8 Kxc8 27.Qc2 Kb7 28.b3 cxb3 29.Qxb3 Ka6 30.Qa3 Kb6 31.Qd6 Qe8 32.Rb1 Qc8 33.Rb3
+- (4.35) Depth: 25/47 01:41:12 10208mN
24.Bxf7+ Qxf7 25.Rxh8+ Kd7 26.Rxc8 Kxc8 27.Qc2 Kb7 28.Rh1 Kb6 29.f4 Ka5 30.Rh8 g6 31.b3 cxb3 32.Ra8+ Na7 33.Qxb3 Ka6 34.Qb4
+- (4.48) Depth: 26/49 02:01:22 12185mN
24.Bxf7+ Qxf7 25.Rxh8+ Kd7 26.Rxc8 Kxc8 27.Qc2 Kb7 28.Rh1 Kb6 29.f4 Ka5 30.Rh8 Qd7 31.b3 cxb3 32.Ra8+ Na7 33.Qxb3 Ka6 34.Rd8 Qf7
+- (4.75) Depth: 27/51 02:43:53 16280mN
24.Bxf7+ Qxf7 25.Rxh8+ Kd7 26.Rxc8 Kxc8 27.Qc2 Kb7 28.Rh1 Kb6 29.f4 Ka5 30.Rh8 g6 31.b3 cxb3 32.Ra8+ Na7 33.Qxb3 Ka6 34.Qb4 Qf5
+- (4.78) Depth: 28/54 03:48:20 23217mN
So 1 hour 25 minutes for Fritz 11 .Now look at Chessmaster GM Ed:
Time Depth Score Positions Moves
0:00 1/3 1.00 1285 24.Qe2 Nb6 25.Bg4
0:00 1/3 1.03 2110 24.Be2 Rxh1 25.Qxh1
0:00 1/4 1.08 7870 24.Qd2 Ra8 25.Bf3 Kd7
0:00 1/5 1.06 21101 24.Qc2 Ra8 25.f3 Ne7 26.Kf2
0:49 2/12 1.29 18455865 24.Bg4 Rg8 25.Qd2 Ra8 26.Bf3 Nb6
27.Rxa8+ Nxa8 28.Kg1 Nb6 29.Bg2
Kf8 30.Rh2
1:09 2/12 1.74 26580209 24.Bxf7+ Kxf7 25.Qf3+ Kg8 26.Rxh8+
Kxh8 27.Qh5+ Kg8 28.Rh1 Rf8 29.Qh7+
Kf7 30.Rh6 Nd8 31.Qg6+ Kg8 32.Bxd8
Qxd8 33.Qh7+ Kf7 34.Rf6+ Qxf6 35.exf6
Kxf6 36.Qh4+ Kf7 37.Qf4+ Kg8 38.Qd6
We have 1 minute and 9 seconds.
GM's should exercise great care when talking about computer chess in public.It looks like this particular GM believes that CHESSBASE= Compterchess. This is a false equation !! CHESSBASE PROGRAMS ARE NOT THE WHOLE OF COMPUTER CHESS. He should have said chessbase programs do not find this tactic at tournament time controls!!!
Incorrect comments by Kavalek :Carlsen's Bxf7+!!
Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman
Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
-
RadioSmall
- Member
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 7:12 pm
-
Ted Summers
- Member
- Posts: 269
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 2:20 pm
- Location: Marietta, GA
- Contact:
2r1k2r/2q2pp1/2n1p3/1p1pP1BB/n1pP4/2P3P1/1P3PK1/R2Q3R w k - 0 1
Analysis by Spike 1.4:
1.Bg4 Rg8 2.Qc2 Ne7 3.Rh7 Qd7 4.Rah1 Ng6 5.f4 Ne7 6.Rh8 Kf8 7.Rxg8+ Nxg8 8.Rh8 Ra8 9.Bxe6 fxe6 10.Qh7
+- (1.41) Depth: 6 00:00:00 23kN
+/- (1.20 --) Depth: 19 00:00:59 41117kN
1.Qc2 Ne7 2.Rh2 Rg8 3.Rah1 Kf8 4.Bg4 Re8 5.Rh7 Ng6 6.Bh5 Ne7 7.Re1 Qb7 8.Kf1 Qd7 9.Rd1 Rb8 10.b3 cxb3 11.Qxb3 Ra8
+/- (1.34) Depth: 19 00:01:19 61750kN
+/- (1.24 --) Depth: 21 00:01:43 85756kN
1.Bxf7+ Kxf7 2.Qf3+ Kg8 3.Rxh8+ Kxh8 4.Qh5+ Kg8 5.Rh1 Ne7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Qh8+ Kf7 8.Qxc8 Qe8 9.Qxe8+ Kxe8 10.Rb1 Kd7 11.f4 Kc6 12.Kf3 Kd7 13.Kg4 Ke7 14.f5 Kf7 15.Kf4 Nb6 16.Rh1
+/- (1.40 ++) Depth: 21 00:01:45 90970kN
+- (4.40) Depth: 22 00:02:08 139mN
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience come from bad decisions."
-
RadioSmall
- Member
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 7:12 pm
Nice try Ted : But look at the Depth of Spike 21 plys vs 12 plys for Chessmaster.Also Chessmaster is still quicker 1 minute 9 seconds vs 1 minute 45 seconds for Spike. I believe that Chessmaster is still the most accurate program for the analysis of HUMAN GAMES.Ted Summers wrote:
2r1k2r/2q2pp1/2n1p3/1p1pP1BB/n1pP4/2P3P1/1P3PK1/R2Q3R w k - 0 1
Analysis by Spike 1.4:
1.Bg4 Rg8 2.Qc2 Ne7 3.Rh7 Qd7 4.Rah1 Ng6 5.f4 Ne7 6.Rh8 Kf8 7.Rxg8+ Nxg8 8.Rh8 Ra8 9.Bxe6 fxe6 10.Qh7
+- (1.41) Depth: 6 00:00:00 23kN
+/- (1.20 --) Depth: 19 00:00:59 41117kN
1.Qc2 Ne7 2.Rh2 Rg8 3.Rah1 Kf8 4.Bg4 Re8 5.Rh7 Ng6 6.Bh5 Ne7 7.Re1 Qb7 8.Kf1 Qd7 9.Rd1 Rb8 10.b3 cxb3 11.Qxb3 Ra8
+/- (1.34) Depth: 19 00:01:19 61750kN
+/- (1.24 --) Depth: 21 00:01:43 85756kN
1.Bxf7+ Kxf7 2.Qf3+ Kg8 3.Rxh8+ Kxh8 4.Qh5+ Kg8 5.Rh1 Ne7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.Qh8+ Kf7 8.Qxc8 Qe8 9.Qxe8+ Kxe8 10.Rb1 Kd7 11.f4 Kc6 12.Kf3 Kd7 13.Kg4 Ke7 14.f5 Kf7 15.Kf4 Nb6 16.Rh1
+/- (1.40 ++) Depth: 21 00:01:45 90970kN
+- (4.40) Depth: 22 00:02:08 139mN
I think Ted was just helping your post by showing how wrong Kavalek was by showing another engine.The judgment on what engine is best for analysing Human games is more of a personal opinion.The King engine is quite a strong engine and I remember the times that there were dedicated Saitek RISC computers that would solve incredibly hard mate puzzles in very fast time.