Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / WCCC 3rd game vs. Pandix
1 2 Previous Next  
Parent - - By Lukas Cimiotti (Bronze) Date 2010-09-26 04:28
Draw agreed
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2010-09-26 05:08
Here is the pgn of the game

I did not analyze it for a long time but chess programs suggest 29...Rd7 after a short time and I wonder if there was a tactical reason not to play this move

[Event "120'/40+60'/20+30'"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2010.09.26"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Pandix"]
[Black "Rybka"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "A29"]
[Annotator ",agur"]
[PlyCount "164"]
[TimeControl "40/7200:20/3600:1800"]

{64MB, Om Master Book 2.0.ctg, URI-AMD} 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3
Bb4 5. Bg2 O-O 6. O-O Bxc3 7. bxc3 d6 8. d3 h6 9. Ne1 e4 10. Nc2 Re8 11. Ne3
Rb8 12. Rb1 b6 13. dxe4 Na5 14. Qc2 Ng4 15. c5 Nxe3 16. Bxe3 Nc4 17. cxb6 axb6
18. Bc1 Bd7 19. a4 Ra8 20. Rb4 Ne5 21. f4 c5 22. Rb1 Bxa4 23. Qd2 Nc4 24. Qd3
b5 25. e5 Rb8 26. Bc6 Re7 27. Ra1 Rc8 28. Bg2 dxe5 29. Rxa4 Qxd3 30. exd3 bxa4
31. dxc4 exf4 32. Bxf4 Re2 33. Ra1 g5 34. Bf3 Rc2 35. Bc1 Rb8 36. Bd5 Rxc3 37.
Ba3 Rd8 38. Kf2 Rc8 39. Ra2 h5 40. Kf1 g4 41. Kf2 Rd8 42. Ra1 Rc8 43. Ke2 Rc2+
44. Kd3 Rxh2 45. Bc1 h4 46. gxh4 Re8 47. Bf4 Rh3+ 48. Kd2 a3 49. Bd6 Ree3 50.
Rg1 Kh7 51. Rxg4 a2 52. Rg1 Ra3 53. Ra1 f5 54. h5 Rxh5 55. Kc1 Ra5 56. Kc2 Rh3
57. Be5 Ra6 58. Kb2 Re3 59. Rh1+ Kg6 60. Rg1+ Kh5 61. Bf4 Rea3 62. Ka1 Rb6 63.
Be5 Rb1+ 64. Rxb1 axb1=Q+ 65. Kxb1 Ra6 66. Bf3+ Kg5 67. Kb2 f4 68. Bc3 Re6 69.
Kc2 Ra6 70. Be1 Ra2+ 71. Kb3 Ra1 72. Bc3 Rb1+ 73. Kc2 Rf1 74. Be4 Kg4 75. Kd2
Rf2+ 76. Kd3 f3 77. Bd2 Re2 78. Be3 Kg3 79. Bxc5 Re1 80. Bc6 Re6 81. Be4 Kg4
82. Bd5 Re8 *
Parent - - By Arifur (**) Date 2010-09-26 09:40
I analysed 29 ..Rd7 a bit. It does look like Rybka could have an advantage after 29 ..Rd7. At least it looked better than 29..Qxd3.
Parent - By Labyrinth (*****) Date 2010-09-26 10:45
What about 32...a3 instead of 32...Rd2 , or is it still a draw at that point
Parent - By Gaмßito (****) Date 2010-09-26 13:25
I think this is not a very good result for Rybka but a very good result for Pandix.

Hardware difference was simply too huge, and I am not happy with Rybka opening. It could have been much more sharper, risky, trying to complicate the game.

Regards,
Gaмßito.
Parent - By Felix Kling (Gold) Date 2010-09-27 09:07
maybe playing 1...d6 against c4 could be a better way to avoid simplification (the endgame after 2.d4 e5 3.dxe?! should offer enough chances for black). It's also in Jiri's book, so...
Parent - - By titanium cranium (***) Date 2010-12-26 14:45
Jeez, half the field was using common everyday hardware versus the Rybka team clusters. These competitions should be renamed to World Chess Hardware Championships since the engines are of secondary relevance. Or, the organizers should handout laptops to each team as they enter the door
Parent - By Ray (****) Date 2010-12-26 18:35
I disagree - give a very weak engine a cluster and it won't win.  The hardware influence is overrated in my opinion, the skill of the programmer almost always prevails. As well as some luck and influence of the opening played, also contribute more to the result than the hardware
- - By tibone Date 2010-10-08 13:14
I wonder if 24...Na5 might have been an alternative? After ...b5 the bishop on a4 looks terrible to me. could anybody analyse 24...Na5 with a computer?
Parent - By Lukas Cimiotti (Bronze) Date 2010-10-08 17:50
The log files tell me: the cluster also thought about 24...Na5, but the score was 73 cp worse.
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / WCCC 3rd game vs. Pandix
1 2 Previous Next  

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill