Chess Genius Pro

This forum is for general discussions and questions, including Collectors Corner and anything to do with Computer chess.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
User avatar
Yarc
Senior Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:13 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Yarc »

Well game 5 was a surprise, the Stardiamond totally stomped all over the MCGP! I was dismayed at how bad the MCGP's position was at the start, and how easily the SD closed in whilst the MCGP seemed clueless.

They followed the Pirc, Austrian Attack, Dragon formation. The MCGP was out of book at move 12 whilst the SD was out of book at move 13.

[Event "40m/2h H book"]
[Date "2016.09.30"]
[Round "5"]
[White "SD"]
[Black "MCGP"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B09"]

1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.f4 Nf6 5.Nf3 c5 6.Bb5+ Bd7 7.e5 Ng4 8.e6 fxe6 9.Ng5 Bxb5 10.Nxb5 Qa5+ 11.c3 Qxb5 12.Nxe6 Qd7 13.Qxg4 Kf7 14.d5 Na6 15.f5 Bf6 16.O-O Rag8 17.Bg5 Nb8 18.Rae1 gxf5 19.Qh5+ Rg6 20.Rxf5 Kg8 21.Bxf6 exf6 22.Nf4 Kg7 23.Re6 Rf8 24.Qe2 Rf7 25.Nh5+ Kh8 26.Nxf6 Rfxf6 27.Rfxf6 Rxf6 28.Rxf6 Na6 29.Qe6 Qxe6 30.dxe6 Kg7 31.Rf7+ Kg6 32.c4 h5 33.Rf8 Nc7 34.e7 a6 35.a4 Kg7 36.e8=Q Nxe8 37.Rxe8 1-0

Final position:
[fen]4R3/1p4k1/p2p4/2p4p/P1P5/8/1P4PP/6K1 b - - 0 37[/fen]

I resigned on behalf of the MCGP, it was not going to regain itself here!

So the SD wins another game, rather easily in this case, and draws level!

Current score 2.5 v 2.5

Getting ready to sell MCGP on Ebay Regards
Ray
User avatar
Yarc
Senior Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:13 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Yarc »

I had thought settings had changed on the MCGP, but double checked after the game: ECO was definitely OFF, and the level was still 40m/2h. Curious loss for the MCGP.
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

Yarc wrote:I had thought settings had changed on the MCGP, but double checked after the game: ECO was definitely OFF, and the level was still 40m/2h. Curious loss for the MCGP.
All i can say thus far is...

:shock: Regards :shock:
Steve
Wardy
Full Member
Posts: 940
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:17 pm
Location: Wellingborough

Post by Wardy »

It's actually much more complicated than just MHZ, which is a meaningless comparison.

Mate in 6 is generally tricky for all dedicated machines to announce during tournament play when there are more than a couple of pieces left on the board as the number of possible positions spirals exponentially and the limited hardware cannot possibly crunch enough of them.

Simplistically programmers generally tackle this by aiming to reduce the number of root moves of the search given serious CPU time, whilst promoting those lines in the search where there are a number of forcing moves like checks or captures for example.

This is why typically a long mate that is found as a result of a series of forcing moves is often solved more quickly than a mate that begins with a quiet move.

Historically Richard Lang did use asymmetric search in some his programmes, this actually reduces the number of it's own moves considered at each ply whilst considering more moves of it's opponents. This reduces the total number of branches that needed evaluating and helped increase overall reported search depth at the expense of potentially missing less obvious continuations. I'd suspect that some element of this move ordering still exists in the MCGP.

Most of the time it makes the MCGP a tougher opponent, at the expense of the occasional less obvious missed opportunity if implemented.

Faced with finite resources in terms of CPU power and time and an almost infinite number of possibilities to consider there is no perfect search possible.
User avatar
Yarc
Senior Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:13 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Yarc »

The problem solving time issue is not just restricted to dedicated machines either. I have read about and tried numerous puzzles with top PC chess engines and found radically different solving times and in some cases one or more of the top engines unable to solve even after thinking for a couple of hours or more! I could say perhaps the ones that failed have a bug but then given another puzzle the results could be different again.

It all depends on the program and puzzle combination. A fair test would be to try several puzzles and measure solving times amongst several dedicated machines. In the case of the 6 move problem my star diamond took much longer to solve it, but have not had the time to try with other machines in my limited collection. I could try it on my Magellan at some point.

Puzzling Regards
Ray
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

While there is a pause at the mid point of Yarc's MCGPRO vs Novag Star Diamond Match...

The CGP walked into the media room covering the match and overheard the assembled reporters,GM's and kibitzers criticizing it for its lackluster play during the first half of the match
clearly offended it challenged anyone in the room to an odds game offering p and move....

after a long silence ...a low metallic voice could be heard from the back of the room

"I Am Fidelity Chess Challenger (EAG 2100)
I'll take those odds.Lets Rock Dude"


CGP whipped out its trusty Selective Search rating list and saw the EAG 2100 listed with a 1827 rating
"Set it up" ..it said

REMOVE BLACK F7 PAWN

[fen]rnbqkbnr/ppppp1pp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1[/fen]

[Date "2016.10.3"]
[White "EAG 2100"]
[Black "MCGPRO"]
[TimeControl "1 Min./Avg."]
[Result "0-1*"]
[Setup "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/ppppp1pp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 Nc6 4.Bd3 g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.O-O O-O 7.Bc4 e6 8.Re1
Nb6 9.Bg5 Qe8 10.Bd3 Qf7 11.Qd2 d6 12.Nc3 dxe5 13.Nxe5 Nxe5 14.dxe5 Nd7
15.Bh6 Bxh6 16.Qxh6 Qxf2+ 17.Kh1 Qc5 18.Bxg6 hxg6 19.Qxg6+ Kh8 20.Qh6+
Kg8


[fen]r1b2rk1/pppn4/4p2Q/2q1P3/8/2N5/PPP3PP/R3R2K w - - 0 21[/fen]

EAG 2100 saked its B on move 18 and can now force Black to exchange its Q for a R to prevent mate with..21.Re3!
instead the 2100 goes on a p grabbing expedition with its Q...

21.Qxe6+ Rf7 22.Qg6+ Rg7 23.Qe8+ Kh7 24.Rad1 Qf2 25.Re2 Qf5 26.e6
Nf6 27.Qf8 Rg8 28.Qe7+ Kh8 29.Qxc7 Bxe6 30.Qxb7 Rab8 31.Qxa7


[fen]1r4rk/Q7/4bn2/5q2/8/2N5/PPP1R1PP/3R3K w - - 0 31[/fen]

an unusual position..
only 31 moves and Black has been relieved of all of its P's

31..Rxb2 32.Qd4
Rg4 33.Ne4 Rf4 34.Qd8+ Ng8 35.Ng3 Qf6 36.Qxf6+ Rxf6 37.c3 Rxe2 38.Nxe2
Bg4 39.Rd2 Bxe2 40.h4 Bc4 41.g4 Rf4 42.Rd4 Rxd4 43.cxd4 Nh6 44.g5 Nf5
45.h5 Bxa2 46.Kg2 Nxd4

[fen]7k/8/8/6PP/3n4/8/b5K1/8 w - - 0 47[/fen]

A Nalimov EGTB win for black in 37 moves...

47.Kg3 Bc4 48.h6 Bd3 49.Kf4 Ne6+ 50.Kg4 Kh7
51.Kh4 Kg6 52.Kg4 Bf5+ 53.Kf3 Kxg5 54.Ke2 Kxh6 55.Ke3 Kg5 56.Kf3 Kf6
57.Ke3 Ke5 58.Kd2 Kd4 59.Ke2 Ng5 60.Kf2 Kd3 61.Kg3 Ke3 62.Kh4 Kf4 63.Kh5
Nf7 64.Kh4 Bd3 65.Kh5 Be4 66.Kh4
Bf3 67.Kh3 Ne5 68.Kh2 Kg4 *

FINAL POSITION
[fen]8/8/8/4n3/6k1/5b2/7K/8 w - - 0 69[/fen]

CGP announces a Mate in 7 Here

CGP now bursting with confidence after this crushing win ..is ready to resume its match Vs the Star Diamond predicting it will score 4-1 in the second half of the match

Invigorated Regards
Steve
User avatar
Yarc
Senior Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:13 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Yarc »

Steve B wrote: CGP now bursting with confidence after this crushing win ..is ready to resume its match Vs the Star Diamond predicting it will score 4-1 in the second half of the match

Invigorated Regards
Steve
:lol:

I liked the game you played, an entertaining diversion, and what a nice machine to have in your collection!

Game 6 is nearly over but I will keep you wondering as to how its going, just to keep the excitement alive.

6.5-3.5 Regards
Ray
User avatar
Yarc
Senior Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:13 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Yarc »

Well game 6 of my 10 game match was long at one hundred moves.

They played the QGD Slav, Wiesbaden variation with the SD going out of book at move 9 and the MCGP at move 10. The MCGP gained an early 2 point lead, but it was a long hard struggle to maintain it as the SD was putting up a good fight. Alas, the SD's 41st move was weak giving up another pawn, curios! Well, they all make mistakes as we have seen. The MCGP's play was pretty solid and slowly whittled away the SD's defence to gain the lead once again.

[Event "40m/2h H book"]
[Date "2016.10.03"]
[Round "6"]
[White "MCGP"]
[Black "SD"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D17"]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 c6 5.a4 Bf5 6.Ne5 e6 7.f3 Bb4 8.Nxc4 O-O 9.Kf2 Nd5 10.Na2 Qh4+ 11.g3 Qf6 12.Kg2 Qg6 13.Ne5 Bc2 14.Nxg6 Bxd1 15.Nxf8 Bxf8 16.e4 Nf6 17.a5 Bc2 18.Nc3 c5 19.Be3 cxd4 20.Bxd4 Nc6 21.Bxf6 gxf6 22.a6 bxa6 23.Rxa6 Nb4 24.Ra1 Bc5 25.Bc4 Rd8 26.Rhe1 Rd4 27.Bb5 Bb3 28.Re2 Rd8 29.Ra3 Bc2 30.Kh1 Kh8 31.Ra1 Bb3 32.Rg2 Nc2 33.Rc1 Ne3 34.Re2 Bb6 35.Kg1 Nd5+ 36.Kg2 Nb4 37.Kh3 e5 38.Rg2 a6 39.Bf1 Be3 40.Ra1 Rd6 41.Kh4 Nc2 42.Rxa6 Rxa6 43.Bxa6 Ne1 44.Re2 Bg5+ 45.Kg4 Be6+ 46.Kh5 Nxf3 47.Rf2 Nd4 48.Nd5 Nb3 49.Bd3 Kg7 50.h4 Bc1 51.g4 Nc5 52.Bb1 Nb3 53.Nxf6 Be3 54.Ne8+ Kf8 55.Re2 Bc5 56.Nf6 Kg7 57.g5 Nd4 58.Rd2 Bb4 59.Rh2 Bb3 60.Rh1 Bc4 61.Kg4 h6 62.Nd5 Bd2 63.gxh6+ Kxh6 64.Ne7 Be2+ 65.Kh3 Kg7 66.Ba2 Kf8 67.Nc8 Bf4 68.Nd6 Ke7 69.Nxf7 Bf3 70.Re1 Nc2 71.Rf1 Bxe4 72.h5 Nb4 73.Bb3 Nc2 74.Nh8 Ne3 75.Rg1 Bf5+ 76.Kh4 Kf6 77.Nf7 e4 78.h6 Bh7 79.Ra1 Ng2+ 80.Kh3 Ne3 81.Ra6+ Ke7 82.Kh4 Bf5 83.Ng5 Ng2+ 84.Kh5 Bc1 85.h7 Nf4+ 86.Kh6 Bxh7 87.Kxh7 e3 88.Nf3 e2 89.Ra4 Kf6 90.Rc4 Be3 91.Re4 Bc1 92.Re8 Nd3 93.Rxe2 Nf4 94.Rc2 Be3 95.Rc4 Kf5 96.Kg7 Kg4 97.Nh2+ Kg5 98.Kf7 Ba7 99.Bc2 Bb8 100.Rc8 Bd6 1-0

The final position:
[fen]2R5/5K2/3b4/6k1/5n2/8/1PB4N/8 w - - 15 101[/fen]
The SD finally resigned.

So the current score is 3.5 - 2.5 to the MCGP. Still not a bad result for the SD and with 4 more games to go anything could happen.

I know there are too few games to draw any conclusions or recognise patterns. However, just out of interest the MCGP has won three games when playing the white pieces, drawn once and lost twice when playing black. If this pattern continued for enough games we might think that the MCGP favours playing white.

Food for thought Regards
Ray
Wardy
Full Member
Posts: 940
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:17 pm
Location: Wellingborough

Post by Wardy »

You misunderstand Mike,

A computer can be as fast as you like but if it's evaluating the wrong nodes it will never make the right move.

MHZ or even nodes per second are irrelevant when comparing computers/programmes, the search tree structure and move ordering and evaluation calculated is what is important.

You can see the evidence from this from a simple perusal of the rating lists.

Take the Fidelity 68000 Club and the Mephisto London 68000. Both run at 12MHZ on the same processor, but the London is rated some 300+ elo higher.

The issue with the MGCP is that it's search tree never gets to the mating position in the time available in the game. But as mentioned in a previous post above this kind of issue has been a characteristic of many computers/programmes/positions across time. Every programmer has to make design decisions, the perfect search ( ie a brute force search of everything) just isn't possible, even with today's processing power.
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

During the pause between games 6 and 7 of Yarc's match...

the CGPRO, now beaming with confidence from its Odds game win and its crushing victory in game 6 ,stormed back into the media room again challenging anyone to another odds game...only this time...odds of KN and move

again a voice in the back of the room could be heard

"I Am Fidelity Chess Challenger(EAG 2100)
KN Odds? PFFFT ..Lets Do This"


REMOVE BLACK KN
[fen]rnbqkb1r/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1[/fen]

[Date "2016.10.4"]
[White "EAG 2100"]
[Black "MCGPRO"]
[TimeControl "1 Min./Avg.]
[Result "1-0*"]
[Setup "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkb1r/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bf5 3.Nc3 e6 4.e3 Bb4 5.Bd3 Bg4 6.h3 Bh5 7.O-O O-O 8.e4
dxe4 9.Bxe4 c6 10.a3 Bd6 11.Be3 Nd7 12.Bd3 Nf6 13.Bg5 Be7 14.Be2 h6
15.Bf4 Qb6 16.b4 a5 17.Na4 Qd8 18.Nc5 b6 19.Nd3 Nd5 20.Qd2 Bf6 21.c3
axb4 22.axb4 Qe7 23.Nde5 Bxe5 24.Bxe5 f6 25.Rxa8 Rxa8 26.Bh2 Ra3 27.Rc1
Qa7 28.Qe1 Qe7 29.h4 c5 30.Bc4 Bxf3 31.gxf3 Qf7 32.bxc5 bxc5 33.dxc5 Qd7
34.Ra1 Rxa1 35.Qxa1 Qb7 36.Qa5 Kf7 37.Kg2 Qc6 38.Bb5 Qc8 39.c6 Ne7 40.c7
g5 41.hxg5 Qg8 42.Bd7 f5 43.c8=Q Qxg5+ 44.Bg3 Nxc8 45.Bxc8
Qe7 46.c4 Qf6 47.Qc7+ Kg6 48.Qd6 Kf7 49.Qd7+ Kg6 50.Qe8+ Qf7 51.Qxf7+
Kxf7 52.Be5 Ke7 53.c5 Kf7 *

FINAL POSITION
[fen]2B5/5k2/4p2p/2P1Bp2/8/5P2/5PK1/8 w - - 0 54[/fen]

CGPRO announces a mate in 9 against itself here
a total crush by the 2100

Back To Earth Regards
Steve
Larry
Senior Member
Posts: 2269
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:42 am
Location: Gosford, NSW Australia

Post by Larry »

This was asking a fair bit of the MCGP. I'm wondering if the
handicap should be time rather than material.
L
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

Larry wrote:This was asking a fair bit of the MCGP

yeah...i guess so ..
i always had an interest in" material" handicap odds games between chess computers..not so much interest in "time " odds games
i tried to develop a formula where a 100 pt difference is worth P odds
300 Pt elo difference is worth Minor Piece odds..500 Pts...R odds..etc..etc
never seems to work out in practice

in the game above we have a difference in Elo of 500+ Pts and KN odds was too much as you pointed out

Off The Beaten Path Regards
Steve
BishopBlougram
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 4:04 am

Post by BishopBlougram »

I'm new here, but I freely admit to a few days of lurking -- ever since I discovered that there were actually strong dedicated chess computers on the market.

As a kid, I had a GK 2100 that would crush me every time, and a few years ago -- while visiting my mom -- I decided to dust if off, and play a few games for old times' sake. I played a couple of G15 and scored around 75%. I found that the CPU simply wasn't fast enough to find the best replies to the gambits I normally play OTB. And at USCF 1900, I'm not a particularly strong player.

Since then, I've been wanting to lay my hands on a stronger unit (it's fun to play on a physical board without the distractions of your laptop, tablet or phone; it's even more fun to be able to win the occasional game), but I soon discovered that the Mephistos from the '90s fetch a pretty penny, which brings us to the ChessGenius Pro, which I could actually afford and allegedly plays on a 2,200+ ELO level.

I received the unit today, and decided to play an off-hand game at 15s/move with ECO off. To my disappointment, it quickly succumbed to my Blackmar-Diemer attack (due to the limited opening book, and, I guess, the limited time/search depth). I'll play another game at a longer time control later this week. I'm looking forward to getting my ass kicked. :) For such a plastic unit, it's surprisingly fun to play with.

Here's the game for what it's worth (I haven't run it through an engine, but 11. Nc6 must be the losing move):

[fen]r2q1rk1/ppp1pp1p/2n2npQ/8/2BP4/2N2N2/PPb3PP/R4RK1[/fen]

[Event "15s/move"]
[Site "Madison"]
[Date "2016.10.04"]
[Round "?"]
[White "BishopBlougram"]
[WhiteElo "1903"]
[Black "ChessGenius Pro"]
[BlackElo "2200"]
[Result "1-0"]

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.O-O O-O 8.Qe1 Bf5
9.Qh4 Bxc2 10.Bh6 Bxh6 11.Qxh6 Nc6 12.Ng5 Qxd4+ 13.Kh1 Qg4 14.Rxf6 Qxg5 15.Qxg5
exf6 16.Qxf6 Bf5 17.Rf1 Rad8 18.g4 Rd6 19.Qg5 Be6 20.Bxe6 Rxe6 21.Nd5 Re5
22.Nf6+ Kg7 23.Qh4 h6 24.Nd7 g5 25.Qf2 f6 26.Nxf6 Kh8 27.Qg2 Re6 28.Nh5 Kg8
29.Rxf8+ Kxf8 30.Qf2+ Ke7 31.Ng3 a5 32.Nf5+ Kd7 33.Nd4 Nxd4 34.Qxd4+ Rd6
35.Qa4+ Kd8 36.Qxa5 b6 37.Qc3 Kd7 38.b4 b5 39.Kg2 c6 40.Qg7+ Kd8 41.Kf3 Re6
42.h4 gxh4 43.Kf4 Kc8 44.Kf5 Rd6 45.Ke5 Rd5+ 46.Ke6 h3 47.Qxh6 h2 48.Qxh2 Kb7
49.Qd6 Rxd6+ 50.Kxd6 Kc8 51.Kxc6 Kd8 52.Kxb5 Ke7 53.a4 Kd6 54.g5 Ke6 55.a5 Kf5
56.a6 Kxg5 57.a7 Kf6 58.a8=Q Ke6 59.Qd8 Ke5 60.Kc5 Kf5 61.Qe7 Kf4 62.Kd4 Kf5
63.Qe5+ Kg6 64.Qf4 Kg7 65.Ke5 Kg6 66.Qf6+ Kh5 67.Qg7 Kh4 68.Kf4 Kh5 69.Qg5#
1-0[/fen]
lexman
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 11:35 pm

Post by lexman »

Yes Nc6 is the fatal error. My own CG Pro takes about 3 mins 50sec to see that ..Nc6 is losing and comes up with Ng4 as an alternative after about 4mins 50secs when stockfish awards black a very slight edge. So I think it would need to be on a tournament setting to avoid this.
If left to think in analysis it later begins to look at Bc2 back to f5,after about 10 mins thought, to avoid the rook sack on f6 which stockfish thinks gives black an edge of about 1.2.
Its hard for older programs to see these kind of sacks with an initial loss of material at active time controls.
User avatar
Yarc
Senior Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:13 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Yarc »

Here is game 7 of my 10 game match between the Millenium ChessGenius Pro and stardiamond. This is at a time control of 40 moves in 2 hours and using the Human book setting on the ChessGenius Pro.

I had high hopes that the MCGP would win a game playing as black which it has yet to achieve in this small match. It started the game with a small advantage of around 0.5 which krept up towards 0.7 and the position looked promising to my eyes. Alas, the SD seeing it was at a slight disadvantage was able to play for a draw and after only 32 moves.

They followed the Queen's Gambit declined, Semi-Slav opening with the SD out of book at move 7 and MCGP out of book at move 8.

[Event "40m/2h H book"]
[Date "2016.10.04"]
[Round "7"]
[White "SD"]
[Black "MCGP"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D31"]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 e6 4.e3 f5 5.f4 Nf6 6.Nf3 Bd6 7.Ne5 O-O 8.Qb3 Ne4 9.Nxe4 fxe4 10.Bd2 Nd7 11.O-O-O a5 12.g4 a4 13.Qc2 a3 14.b3 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Be7 16.h4 Bd7 17.h5 h6 18.g5 hxg5 19.h6 Rf7 20.hxg7 Rxg7 21.Be2 gxf4 22.exf4 Qb6 23.Kb1 Qf2 24.Rde1 b5 25.Qc1 d4 26.Rhf1 Qg2 27.Rg1 Qh2 28.Rh1 Qg3 29.Rhg1 Qf2 30.Rgf1 Qg3 31.Rg1 Qf2 32.Rgf1 1/2-1/2

Final position:
[fen]r5k1/3bb1r1/2p1p3/1p2P3/2PppP2/pP6/P2BBq2/1KQ1RR2 b - - 13 32[/fen]

Draw by threefold repetition.

So that brings the current score to 4 - 3 to the MCGP. It's a close match so far, but if the MCGP plays better with the white pieces it may extend its lead by 2 points in the next game.

Wait and see Regards
Ray.
Post Reply