What a move 11.a3!! Aronian-Carlsen_Norway Chess 2017

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Dann Corbit, hgm

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
IQ
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 9:46 am

Re: What a move 11.a3!! Aronian-Carlsen_Norway Chess 2017

Post by IQ » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:25 am

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: you are indeed pitiful.
Is this your analysis of my proposed Kd3 in your pet line? Well I guess you already know that you lost again (in all your useless self-engine play - does that even count as analysis these days - Kf3? was played). To use your own terminology: You have been annihalated... twice! The only thing that astonishes me is how weak your analysis in all lines has been. It's clear that a low rated player with only 2180 elo makes mistakes in judgement, but I had expected more of your skills in operating an engine and interpreting the results. Sad!

Jeroen
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: For the enjoyment of mr Tsvetkov: a serious game

Post by Jeroen » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:30 am

Relax, I am playing more games. Takes time. Above someone posted 3 more serious games where white was winning easily.

So in serious games white has a 100% score. I don't doubt that I will show you more wins today. In serious games.

Thus, it is time to reconsider your point of view: this ending is not "an easy draw", it is most likely lost for black. Which cannot be a huge surprise: black's knight is passive, pawn c6 is weak and your king cannot become active (yet). In the meantime, white's currently passive bishop can easily be activated.

Jeroen
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: What a move 11.a3!! Aronian-Carlsen_Norway Chess 2017

Post by Jeroen » Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:11 am

no one going to come to my rescue?
If you are offering interesting suggestions (and I am sure you do) and ask me to investigate them and share opinions, I am very willing to help you and support you.

However, if you make a false claim, which is refuted by analysis and instead you deny everything and start to be rude, I will not support you but keep pointing out where you are wrong (and I will also be sarcastic from time to time).

If you make a bold statement without the support of engine analysis, you are bound to get reactions from (many) people in this forum, especially if your statement is wrong. The engines will quickly point out such mistakes. Of course there is no big deal to be wrong from time to time, also happens to me. But then say "OK, I was wrong, let's try something different".

Jeroen
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: What a move 11.a3!! Aronian-Carlsen_Norway Chess 2017

Post by Jeroen » Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:46 am

you are indeed pitiful.
Why are you being rude to mr Possioto? He is 100% correct. For one time, admit that you are wrong and that you overestimate black's drawing chances in that ending.

If you keep acting like this, no wonder more and more people will jump in to refute your analysis......

Jeroen
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: 11.a3!! Aronian-Carlsen_Norway Chess 2017: SUMMARY

Post by Jeroen » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:09 am

so far, a3 clearly leads to a draw, what is so apocalyptical about that?
See? You keep doing it. Even if 5 serious games lead to a clear 5-0 win for white in the ending starting with the Ne4 line, you keep on denying and persist that you are right and the rest of the world is wrong.

I cannot help you if you keep acting like this.

Jeroen
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: For Possioto and Noomen enjoyment!

Post by Jeroen » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:19 am

Why shun away from the truth, Jeroen?
The truth is, that in 5 serious games (instead of shoot outs, which are low quality games) white currently has a 100% score. BTW, a 6th win is underway. That makes it 6-0, quite convincing. If you wish, I can try a few games on my Quad. My prediction? More white wins.
I would be happy, if someone runs 1000+ statistically relevant games at LTC, but am very much afraid draw score will only rise, as defense is generally easier with longer time.
So far the games with a longer time control only lead to white wins. Which is the exact opposite of what you claim....

Jeroen
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: For the enjoyment of mr Tsvetkov: a 3rd serious game

Post by Jeroen » Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:29 am

Third game, another white win. I only have free Komodo 9.02, but that is the 3rd strongest engine I have, so I used it (and if, according to Lyudmil, it is a draw anyway, K9.02 should be strong enough to keep the draw). Alas, no chance for black in this game, too. So it is now 6-0 in favour for white in serious games.

[pgn][Event "Core i5 @1.8GHz, Rapid 60m"]
[Site "Chess"]
[Date "2017.06.16"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Stockfish 180317 64 POPCNT"]
[Black "Komodo 9.02 64-bit"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D45"]
[Annotator "1.35;1.15"]
[PlyCount "129"]
[TimeControl "3600"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. e3 a6 6. b3 Bb4 7. Bd2 Nbd7 8. Bd3
O-O 9. O-O Qe7 10. Bc2 Rd8 11. a3 Bxa3 12. Rxa3 Qxa3 13. c5 Ne4 14. Bxe4 dxe4
15. Ng5 h6 16. Ngxe4 a5 17. Qc2 a4 18. bxa4 Qb4 19. Nd6 Qa5 20. Nd5 Qxa4 21.
Ne7+ Kf8 22. Qxa4 Rxa4 23. Nexc8 Ra8 24. Rb1 Rdxc8 25. Nxc8 Rxc8 26. Rxb7 {
Both last book move} Ra8 {1.15/22 38} 27. Kf1 {1.35/31 172} Ke7 {1.14/26 209}
28. e4 {1.33/33 132 (Ke2)} Kd8 {1.13/27 199} 29. Bf4 {1.49/31 60} Ra1+ {
1.14/26 56 (f5)} 30. Ke2 {1.52/34 111} Ra2+ {1.29/26 142} 31. Kd3 {1.54/30 16
(Ke3)} Rxf2 {1.33/26 277 (Ra3+)} 32. Bc7+ {1.87/29 69} Kc8 {1.43/27 77} 33. Ra7
{1.64/30 21} Rxg2 {1.53/25 98} 34. Bd6 {2.12/30 65} Rg1 {1.39/25 42} 35. Rc7+ {
2.10/29 25} Kd8 {1.42/25 36} 36. Rxc6 {2.18/32 140} Rd1+ {1.91/26 237} 37. Ke3
{2.32/32 62} Re1+ {1.96/23 37} 38. Kd2 {2.31/31 19} Ra1 {2.09/25 65} 39. Rc7 {
2.43/31 62} Nf6 {2.02/26 77 (h5)} 40. e5 {2.68/32 48} Ra2+ {2.09/27 50} 41. Kd3
{2.91/33 21} Ra3+ {1.88/28 45} 42. Kc4 {2.62/40 215} Rc3+ {2.05/28 25} 43. Kb5
{2.51/39 26} Nd5 {1.90/30 49 (Rb3+)} 44. Rxf7 {3.17/36 57} Rb3+ {1.98/30 23}
45. Ka4 {3.24/34 16} Rb4+ {1.91/30 41} 46. Ka3 {3.33/36 44} Rc4 {1.68/27 28}
47. Rxg7 {3.33/39 20} h5 {2.06/30 48} 48. h4 {3.33/44 67} Kc8 {2.08/30 33 (Ke8)
} 49. Rh7 {3.82/31 36} Kd8 {2.08/28 23} 50. Rxh5 {2.79/39 119} Kd7 {2.09/26 38}
51. Rh8 {2.79/40 40} Kc6 {2.10/27 35} 52. h5 {2.79/42 87} Rc3+ {2.12/27 26} 53.
Kb2 {2.79/43 88} Rh3 {2.19/26 25} 54. h6 {2.79/42 16} Rh2+ {2.19/26 25} 55. Kb3
{3.69/44 445 (Kc1)} Rh3+ {2.81/25 110} 56. Kc2 {3.75/37 32} Nb4+ {2.74/25 38}
57. Kd2 {3.75/37 8} Kd5 {2.74/25 12} 58. Rd8 {3.82/39 49} Nc6 {2.81/26 40} 59.
Rd7 {3.82/40 49} Kxd4 {2.80/23 14} 60. Bf8+ {3.82/38 9} Kxe5 {2.88/25 40} 61.
Rd6 {3.82/40 42} Na7 {2.93/26 40 (Na5)} 62. Ra6 {6.68/29 20 (Bg7+)} Nb5 {
2.78/23 14} 63. Ra5 {6.90/29 10} Nc7 {3.31/26 39} 64. c6+ {7.06/32 30 (Bd6+)}
Ke4 {3.75/22 21} 65. Bg7 {7.13/32 6 adjud.} 1-0[/pgn]

fastgm
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:57 pm
Contact:

Re: What a move 11.a3!! Aronian-Carlsen_Norway Chess 2017

Post by fastgm » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:03 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
fastgm wrote:[d]r2k4/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3PP3/8/3B1PPP/5K2 w - -

This position is also already lost. Here my analyzes:

29.Bf4 f5 30.exf5 exf5 31.Bd6 g5 32.g3 g4 33.Rc7 Ra4 34.Rxc6 Rxd4 35.Ra6 Kc8 (35....Ke8 36.c6! Rxd6 37.c7 +-) 36.Bf4 Kb7 37.Rxh6 +-

29.Bf4 f5 30.exf5 exf5 31.Bd6 and Stockfish is already over +3
31...g5 32.Rc7 Ra4 33.Rxc6 Rxd4 34.Bc7+ Ke7 35. Rxh6 Nxc5 36.Be5 Rd5 37.Bf6+ Kf7 38.Bxg5 Ne4 39.Be3 Nf6 40.h3

49/70 01:40 6.934.425k 69.140k +4,56 40.h3 Rb5 41.g3 Rb4 42.Kg2 Ra4 43.Bg5 Ne4 44.Bf4 Nf6 45.Be5 Ne4 46.h4 Ra5 47.Bd4 Rd5 48.Be3 Nf6 49.Bg5 Ne4 50.Rb6 Rc5 51.Rb7+ Ke6 52.Be3 Rd5 53.Rb4 Nf6 54.Rb6+ Kf7 55.Bg5 Ne4 56.Rh6 Ra5 57.Be3 Nc5 58.Rb6 Nd3 59.Rd6 Ra3 60.h5 Ne1+ 61.Kh3 Nf3 62.h6 Ra8 63.Rb6 Re8 64.Bc1 Rd8 65.Kg2 Ne1+ 66.Kf1 Nd3 67.Bg5 Re8 68.Rb7+ Kg6 69.Rg7+ Kh5 70.h7 Rh8 71.Be3 Nb4
this time you are certainly acting incorrect, Andreas.

you have chosen yourself a line going some 10 moves deep, that is certainly having a lot of gaps, and then, based on the position you liked, you simply switched on SF.

sorry, but that is more than ludicrous.

many engine matches have confirmed the position is much more drawn as otherwise, please see relevant post.

if you like, you might conduct a big test with LTC, to see what the actual state of affairs is.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
yanquis1972 wrote:[d]r2k4/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3PP3/8/3B1PPP/5K2 w - -

ive spent some time trying different stockfish variations here (i'm terrible at chess, worse at endgames, & impatient w/ hardware, & lacking 6-man tablebaes, so this is nothing but throwing out scraps for thought) & the recurring theme is that black cannot stop the bishop parking on d6 & after this invariably ends up in zugzwang.

(trying komodo, it seems to recognize this theme very quickly & sacs the e-pawn, but i believe this loses too. another variation it sacs its knight & at first looks like it might just have a draw but continuing it i'm getting over +3 (my cutoff, as i lack the knowledge myself to know a won endgame & continuing manually from here in all variations would take ages. but it definitely seems komodo has some nice endgame knowledge SF is lacking)

from this deeply ignorant perspective, though, it certainly seems to me that if this position IS drawn, to be held OTB would require absolutely brilliant play...which i find as further support that a3 is a !! move. still i'm curious to see this latest position demonstrated concretely one way or the other, as i do think it's achievable.
ok, I have this one:

[pgn][Event "Blitz 1m"]
[Site "Microsoft"]
[Date "2017.06.15"]
[Round "?"]
[White "SF 8, owner"]
[Black "myself"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[Annotator "owner"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "r2k4/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3PP3/8/3B1PPP/5K2 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "10"]
[TimeControl "60"]

{512MB, OWNER-PC} 1. Bf4 {0} f5 {0} 2. exf5 {1.10/19 1} exf5 {1.32/18 0} 3. Bd6
{1.45/17 0} g5 {1.33/19 0} 4. g3 {1.50/18 0} g4 {3} 5. Rc7 {1.40/20 2} Ra4 {1.
31/19 0} (5... Ra4 {1.34/20 0} 6. Rxc6 {1.54/21 0} Rxd4 {1.66/21 0} 7. Ra6 {1.
71/20 0} Ke8 {1.34/18 0} 8. Kg2 {1.35/20 0} Kf7 {1.32/21 0} 9. c6 {1.36/23 0}
Rxd6 {1.30/26 0} 10. c7 {1.30/28 0} Rxa6 {1.30/28 0} 11. c8=Q {1.30/30 0} Rd6 {
1.30/30 0} 12. Qh8 {1.30/26 0} Nf8 {1.30/29 0} 13. Qe5 {1.30/26 0} Rf6 {1.30/
28 0} 14. Qd5+ {1.30/27 0} Ne6 {1.30/28 0} 15. Qd7+ {1.30/27 0} Kg6 {1.30/29 0}
16. Qe8+ {1.30/29 0} Kh7 {1.30/29 0} 17. h3 {1.30/29 0} Ng7 {1.30/29 0} 18. Qd7
{1.30/29 0} h5 {1.30/26 0} 19. f3 {1.30/29 0} Re6 {1.30/28 0} 20. Qd3 {1.30/30
0}) 1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

draw, is not it?

any suggestions, improvements?

time to see your analysis.
Lyudmil, it's not "my line", you suggested 29...f5 and I showed you my improvements, as you've requested. After 30.exf5 exf5 31.Bd6 black is completely lost, confirmed by Stockfish's eval over +3 at depth 50!
There is no fortress.

Stockfish 160617 64 BMI2: Intel E5-2686 v4, 32 threads, 32 GB Hash, 5-men Syzygy-Tablebases
50/97 1:32:31 310.691.952k 55.965k -3,19 31. ... g5 32.Ke2 Nf6 33.Rf7 Ra2+ 34.Kd3 Ra3+ 35.Kc2 Ne4 36.Rxf5 Ra2+ 37.Kd3 Nxf2+ 38.Kc4 Ne4 39.Rf8+ Kd7 40.Rf7+ Kd8 41.Bc7+ Ke8 42.Rh7 Rxg2 43.Rxh6

Another possible continuation 31...g5 32.Rc7 Ra4 33.Rxc6 Rxd4 34.Bc7+ Ke7 35. Rxh6 Nxc5 36.Be5 Rd5 37.Bf6+ Kf7 38.Bxg5 Ne4 39.Be3 Nf6 40.h3 +-
or
31...g5 32.Rc7 Ra6 33.g3 h5 34.Kg2 Ra4 35.Rxc6 Rxd4 36.Ra6 +-

[pgn][Event "Norway Chess"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2017.06.15"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Aronian"]
[Black "Carlsen"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D45"]
[PlyCount "79"]
[EventDate "2017.??.??"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. e3 a6 6. b3 Bb4 7. Bd2 Nbd7 8. Bd3 O-O 9. O-O Qe7 10. Bc2 Rd8 11. a3 Bxa3 12. Rxa3 Qxa3 13. c5 Ne4 14. Bxe4 dxe4 15. Ng5 h6 16. Ngxe4 a5 17. Qc2 a4 18. bxa4 Qb4 19. Nd6 Qa5 20. Nd5 Qxa4 21. Ne7+ Kf8 22. Qxa4 Rxa4 23. Nexc8 Ra8 24. Rb1 Rdxc8 25. Nxc8 Rxc8 26. Rxb7 Ra8 27. Kf1 Ke7 28. e4 Kd8 29. Bf4 f5 30. exf5 exf5 31. Bd6 g5 32. Rc7 Ra4 33. Rxc6 Rxd4 34. Bc7+ Ke7 35. Rxh6 Nxc5 36. Be5 Rd5 37. Bf6+ Kf7 38. Bxg5 Ne4 39. Be3 Nf6 40. h3 1-0[/pgn]

User avatar
MikeB
Posts: 4500
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:34 am
Location: Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania

Re: What a move 11.a3!! Aronian-Carlsen_Norway Chess 2017

Post by MikeB » Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:27 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
MikeB wrote:a little longer time control - McB25 ( not yet released) vs K1101 and the second game is dev-SF vs K1101 with same settings
game 5 min 5 sec, with two cores

the third game under the ellipsis pull-down on t upper left is McB vs Dev-SF, 8 cores each , game 10 min/10 sec McB was seeing mate in 18 moves

[pgn][Event "Mac Pro x5690 3.46 Ghz 18 CPU"]
[Site "Mac-Pro.local"]
[Date "2017.06.16"]
[Round "-"]
[White "McBrain 2.5 64 POPCNT"]
[Black "Komodo 11.01 64-bit"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300+5"]
[FEN "1r3k2/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3P4/4P3/3B1PPP/6K1 w - - 1 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

1. Rxb8+ {+1.35/31 +287} Nxb8 {-1.46/24 +300} 2. Kf1 {+1.37/32 +291} Ke7
{-1.38/27 +291} 3. Ke2 {+1.35/32 +287} Nd7 {-1.42/28 +284} 4. Bb4
{+1.36/29 +289} f5 {-1.53/29 +267} 5. Kd3 {+1.37/30 +286} g5
{-1.46/30 +252} 6. f3 {+1.43/33 +284} Kf7 {-1.56/30 +247} 7. Kc4
{+1.43/32 +288} Nf6 {-1.59/28 +237} 8. Ba5 {+1.53/33 +274} Nd5
{-1.60/29 +228} 9. Bd2 {+1.53/29 +275} Nf6 {-1.72/30 +207} 10. Kd3
{+1.56/30 +271} Nd7 {-1.60/30 +199} 11. e4 {+1.74/29 +269} Nf6
{-1.50/30 +193} 12. h4 {+1.72/30 +272} Kg6 {-1.50/32 +185} 13. hxg5
{+1.78/33 +270} hxg5 {-1.68/28 +186} 14. Ke3 {+1.79/32 +272} Kf7
{-1.65/31 +182} 15. Bc3 {+1.85/33 +271} Nd7 {-1.86/34 +119} 16. Ba5
{+2.34/33 +270} Ke7 {-1.66/29 +119} 17. exf5 {+4.37/27 +270} exf5
{-4.36/29 +111} 18. d5 {+4.71/26 +271} cxd5 {-6.08/32 +94} 19. Kd4
{+7.25/29 +268} Ke6 {-8.14/29 +88} 20. c6 {+11.04/28 +262} Ne5
{-1.68/27 +90} 21. c7 {+14.81/26 +260} Nc6+ {-11.52/28 +90} 22. Kc5
{+56.20/25 +263} Na7 {-18.34/29 +87} 23. Bb6 {+128.39/35 +261} Nc8
{-250.00/32 +87} 24. Kc6 {+128.40/32 +263} Ne7+ {-250.00/36 +82} 25. Kb7
{+128.42/37 +256} Kd7 {-250.00/37 +79} 26. Bc5 {+128.43/40 +248} Nc8
{-250.00/37 +68} 27. Kb8 {+128.44/39 +246} g4 {-250.00/36 +29} 28. fxg4
{+128.45/37 +240} f4 {-250.00/25 +32} 29. Kb7 {+128.45/34 +241} d4
{-250.00/28 +34} 30. Bxd4 {+128.46/38 +235} Nd6+ {-250.00/31 +36} 31. Kb8
{+128.47/37 +237} Nc8 {-250.00/31 +36} 32. Bc5 {+128.48/36 +226} Ke6
{-250.00/33 +38} 33. Kxc8 {+128.49/38 +218} Kf6 {-250.00/33 +38} 34. Bd6
{+128.50/37 +220} Kf7 {-250.00/38 +39} 35. Bxf4 {+128.50/39 +208} Ke6
{-1000.06/31 +43} 36. Kd8 {+1000.06/90 +205} Kd5 {-1000.05/59 +48} 37. c8=Q
{+1000.05/101 +208} Kd4 {-1000.04/99 +52} 38. Qc2 {+1000.04/127 +212} Kd5
{-1000.03/5 +57} 39. Kd7 {+1000.03/127 +217} Kd4 {-1000.02/5 +62} 40. Qb3
{+1000.02/127 +222} Ke4 {-1000.01/99 +67} 41. Qc4# {+1000.01/127 +227}
{White mates} 1-0

[Event "Mac Pro x5690 3.46 Ghz 18 CPU"]
[Site "Mac-Pro.local"]
[Date "2017.06.16"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Stockfish 140617 64 POPC"]
[Black "Komodo 11.01 64-bit"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300+5"]
[FEN "1r3k2/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3P4/4P3/3B1PPP/6K1 w - - 1 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

{--------------
. r . . . k . .
. R . n . p p .
. . p . p . . p
. . P . . . . .
. . . P . . . .
. . . . P . . .
. . . B . P P P
. . . . . . K .
white to play
--------------}
1. Rxb8+ {+1.32/31 +290} Nxb8 {-1.45/26 +299} 2. Kf1 {+1.41/33 +278} Ke7
{-1.41/26 +290} 3. Ba5 {+1.48/33 +264} Na6 {-1.44/27 +284} 4. Ke2
{+1.50/32 +263} e5 {-1.38/27 +282} 5. dxe5 {+1.74/27 +263} Ke6
{-1.48/27 +274} 6. Kd3 {+1.78/26 +266} Nxc5+ {-1.68/26 +266} 7. Kc4
{+1.54/35 +236} Na4 {-1.45/26 +264} 8. f4 {+1.77/34 +237} Nb2+
{-1.84/28 +254} 9. Kd4 {+2.09/33 +229} h5 {-2.21/27 +245} 10. Bb6
{+2.29/33 +229} Kf5 {-2.14/32 +230} 11. g3 {+2.47/32 +231} Ke6
{-2.17/33 +220} 12. e4 {+2.50/38 +230} Nd1 {-2.17/34 +216} 13. Kc4
{+2.71/37 +230} Nb2+ {-1.65/29 +215} 14. Kd4 {+2.89/35 +229} Nd1
{-2.17/32 +215} 15. f5+ {+3.02/31 +232} Kd7 {-2.47/31 +214} 16. Kd3
{+3.10/36 +229} Nb2+ {-2.51/34 +207} 17. Kc2 {+3.10/38 +232} Nc4
{-2.57/33 +205} 18. Bd4 {+3.24/38 +227} Na3+ {-2.82/32 +180} 19. Kd3
{+3.68/31 +227} Nb5 {-2.83/33 +177} 20. h3 {+4.74/29 +222} Ke7
{-3.26/29 +174} 21. g4 {+5.22/29 +219} hxg4 {-4.60/31 +150} 22. hxg4
{+6.72/30 +214} Kf8 {-5.91/31 +143} 23. Kc4 {+8.91/31 +211} Na3+
{-7.34/32 +130} 24. Kc5 {+10.45/26 +214} Nc2 {-9.21/31 +127} 25. Bf2
{+15.14/28 +213} Ke7 {-11.91/31 +124} 26. Kxc6 {+18.05/27 +215} Nb4+
{-13.59/32 +121} 27. Kc7 {+128.27/29 +212} Nd3 {-14.59/33 +116} 28. Bh4+
{+128.30/28 +215} Kf8 {-25.40/31 +113} 29. Kd6 {+128.37/41 +213} Nb2
{-250.00/34 +113}
{User adjudication} 1-0

[Event "Mac Pro x5690 3.46 Ghz 18 CPU"]
[Site "Mac-Pro.local"]
[Date "2017.06.16"]
[Round "-"]
[White "McBrain 2.5 64 POPCNT"]
[Black "Stockfish 140617 64 POPC"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "600+10"]
[FEN "1r3k2/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3P4/4P3/3B1PPP/6K1 w - - 1 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

1. Rxb8+ {+1.45/38 +578} Nxb8 {-1.54/40 +559} 2. Kf1 {+1.43/35 +585} f6
{-1.62/39 +534} 3. Ke2 {+1.57/33 +585} Nd7 {-1.63/39 +540} 4. g4
{+1.66/36 +575} Ke8 {-1.63/35 +532} 5. Kd3 {+1.75/35 +575} Ke7
{-2.10/36 +485} 6. f3 {+2.41/40 +481} Kf7 {-2.30/39 +430} 7. Kc4
{+3.03/42 +407} f5 {-2.31/46 +423} 8. gxf5 {+3.13/42 +409} exf5
{-3.00/38 +426} 9. e4 {+3.14/33 +416} fxe4 {-3.49/45 +410} 10. fxe4
{+4.04/41 +383} Nf6 {-3.56/35 +417} 11. Kd3 {+4.12/28 +390} Ke7
{-4.82/41 +367} 12. h4 {+4.56/37 +389} Ke6 {-5.81/46 +340} 13. Bf4
{+4.77/38 +397} Ng4 {-6.60/48 +285} 14. Ke2 {+5.07/39 +397} Nf6
{-7.47/48 +236} 15. Ke3 {+5.25/28 +402} Nd7 {-7.46/36 +222} 16. Kd3
{+7.32/30 +401} Ke7 {-8.31/41 +200} 17. Bd6+ {+52.87/27 +400} Ke6
{-7.95/41 +187} 18. e5 {+128.38/47 +400} g6 {-128.39/51 +170} 19. Ke4
{+128.39/43 +406} g5 {-128.39/62 +162} 20. hxg5 {+128.40/49 +399} hxg5
{-128.40/70 +170} 21. Kf3 {+128.41/48 +405}
{User adjudication} 1-0


[/pgn]

it looks pretty good to me for white, but I will let the experts have the final say...
this is already going 7 to 1; previously it was 5 to 1, but now more hating people joined into the tussle.

no one going to come to my rescue?

well, Mike, you have been matching 2 different engines, certainly not the best way to proceed.

just 3 games? but then, you might not have posted the 5 drawn ones? :)

I must admit this position is completely waful for engines, as they do not have fortress detection.

in my own quick tests, I have 9 wins and 11 draws after 20 games with 10 different engines at 1' + 1''.
draws still prevail, but not by much.

looking at the games, engines simply miss some obvious fortress positions. Komodo is fully awful here. Same for SF and the rest.

why do we need to develop such engines that are completely useless for analysis? I would agree with Daniel current engine development is in a deadlock.

I am 101% sure the position is a dead draw, can demosntrate it in every possible way, but top engines might well fail here.

Anyone having doubts Carlsen would have easily drawn this?
I don't hate you Lyudmil, in fact, at first I thought you were correct. I ran just three games. Not saying you're wrong now either , but I do think the evidence might be pointing the other way. I'm admire your tenacity for sticking to your belief , but I would probably admire you even more if you were to admit that perhaps you error. Anyway , it's all gods stuff, certainly a good position to analyze more deeply. 😊

User avatar
MikeB
Posts: 4500
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:34 am
Location: Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania

Re: What a move 11.a3!! Aronian-Carlsen_Norway Chess 2017

Post by MikeB » Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:28 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
MikeB wrote:a little longer time control - McB25 ( not yet released) vs K1101 and the second game is dev-SF vs K1101 with same settings
game 5 min 5 sec, with two cores

the third game under the ellipsis pull-down on t upper left is McB vs Dev-SF, 8 cores each , game 10 min/10 sec McB was seeing mate in 18 moves

[pgn][Event "Mac Pro x5690 3.46 Ghz 18 CPU"]
[Site "Mac-Pro.local"]
[Date "2017.06.16"]
[Round "-"]
[White "McBrain 2.5 64 POPCNT"]
[Black "Komodo 11.01 64-bit"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300+5"]
[FEN "1r3k2/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3P4/4P3/3B1PPP/6K1 w - - 1 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

1. Rxb8+ {+1.35/31 +287} Nxb8 {-1.46/24 +300} 2. Kf1 {+1.37/32 +291} Ke7
{-1.38/27 +291} 3. Ke2 {+1.35/32 +287} Nd7 {-1.42/28 +284} 4. Bb4
{+1.36/29 +289} f5 {-1.53/29 +267} 5. Kd3 {+1.37/30 +286} g5
{-1.46/30 +252} 6. f3 {+1.43/33 +284} Kf7 {-1.56/30 +247} 7. Kc4
{+1.43/32 +288} Nf6 {-1.59/28 +237} 8. Ba5 {+1.53/33 +274} Nd5
{-1.60/29 +228} 9. Bd2 {+1.53/29 +275} Nf6 {-1.72/30 +207} 10. Kd3
{+1.56/30 +271} Nd7 {-1.60/30 +199} 11. e4 {+1.74/29 +269} Nf6
{-1.50/30 +193} 12. h4 {+1.72/30 +272} Kg6 {-1.50/32 +185} 13. hxg5
{+1.78/33 +270} hxg5 {-1.68/28 +186} 14. Ke3 {+1.79/32 +272} Kf7
{-1.65/31 +182} 15. Bc3 {+1.85/33 +271} Nd7 {-1.86/34 +119} 16. Ba5
{+2.34/33 +270} Ke7 {-1.66/29 +119} 17. exf5 {+4.37/27 +270} exf5
{-4.36/29 +111} 18. d5 {+4.71/26 +271} cxd5 {-6.08/32 +94} 19. Kd4
{+7.25/29 +268} Ke6 {-8.14/29 +88} 20. c6 {+11.04/28 +262} Ne5
{-1.68/27 +90} 21. c7 {+14.81/26 +260} Nc6+ {-11.52/28 +90} 22. Kc5
{+56.20/25 +263} Na7 {-18.34/29 +87} 23. Bb6 {+128.39/35 +261} Nc8
{-250.00/32 +87} 24. Kc6 {+128.40/32 +263} Ne7+ {-250.00/36 +82} 25. Kb7
{+128.42/37 +256} Kd7 {-250.00/37 +79} 26. Bc5 {+128.43/40 +248} Nc8
{-250.00/37 +68} 27. Kb8 {+128.44/39 +246} g4 {-250.00/36 +29} 28. fxg4
{+128.45/37 +240} f4 {-250.00/25 +32} 29. Kb7 {+128.45/34 +241} d4
{-250.00/28 +34} 30. Bxd4 {+128.46/38 +235} Nd6+ {-250.00/31 +36} 31. Kb8
{+128.47/37 +237} Nc8 {-250.00/31 +36} 32. Bc5 {+128.48/36 +226} Ke6
{-250.00/33 +38} 33. Kxc8 {+128.49/38 +218} Kf6 {-250.00/33 +38} 34. Bd6
{+128.50/37 +220} Kf7 {-250.00/38 +39} 35. Bxf4 {+128.50/39 +208} Ke6
{-1000.06/31 +43} 36. Kd8 {+1000.06/90 +205} Kd5 {-1000.05/59 +48} 37. c8=Q
{+1000.05/101 +208} Kd4 {-1000.04/99 +52} 38. Qc2 {+1000.04/127 +212} Kd5
{-1000.03/5 +57} 39. Kd7 {+1000.03/127 +217} Kd4 {-1000.02/5 +62} 40. Qb3
{+1000.02/127 +222} Ke4 {-1000.01/99 +67} 41. Qc4# {+1000.01/127 +227}
{White mates} 1-0

[Event "Mac Pro x5690 3.46 Ghz 18 CPU"]
[Site "Mac-Pro.local"]
[Date "2017.06.16"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Stockfish 140617 64 POPC"]
[Black "Komodo 11.01 64-bit"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300+5"]
[FEN "1r3k2/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3P4/4P3/3B1PPP/6K1 w - - 1 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

{--------------
. r . . . k . .
. R . n . p p .
. . p . p . . p
. . P . . . . .
. . . P . . . .
. . . . P . . .
. . . B . P P P
. . . . . . K .
white to play
--------------}
1. Rxb8+ {+1.32/31 +290} Nxb8 {-1.45/26 +299} 2. Kf1 {+1.41/33 +278} Ke7
{-1.41/26 +290} 3. Ba5 {+1.48/33 +264} Na6 {-1.44/27 +284} 4. Ke2
{+1.50/32 +263} e5 {-1.38/27 +282} 5. dxe5 {+1.74/27 +263} Ke6
{-1.48/27 +274} 6. Kd3 {+1.78/26 +266} Nxc5+ {-1.68/26 +266} 7. Kc4
{+1.54/35 +236} Na4 {-1.45/26 +264} 8. f4 {+1.77/34 +237} Nb2+
{-1.84/28 +254} 9. Kd4 {+2.09/33 +229} h5 {-2.21/27 +245} 10. Bb6
{+2.29/33 +229} Kf5 {-2.14/32 +230} 11. g3 {+2.47/32 +231} Ke6
{-2.17/33 +220} 12. e4 {+2.50/38 +230} Nd1 {-2.17/34 +216} 13. Kc4
{+2.71/37 +230} Nb2+ {-1.65/29 +215} 14. Kd4 {+2.89/35 +229} Nd1
{-2.17/32 +215} 15. f5+ {+3.02/31 +232} Kd7 {-2.47/31 +214} 16. Kd3
{+3.10/36 +229} Nb2+ {-2.51/34 +207} 17. Kc2 {+3.10/38 +232} Nc4
{-2.57/33 +205} 18. Bd4 {+3.24/38 +227} Na3+ {-2.82/32 +180} 19. Kd3
{+3.68/31 +227} Nb5 {-2.83/33 +177} 20. h3 {+4.74/29 +222} Ke7
{-3.26/29 +174} 21. g4 {+5.22/29 +219} hxg4 {-4.60/31 +150} 22. hxg4
{+6.72/30 +214} Kf8 {-5.91/31 +143} 23. Kc4 {+8.91/31 +211} Na3+
{-7.34/32 +130} 24. Kc5 {+10.45/26 +214} Nc2 {-9.21/31 +127} 25. Bf2
{+15.14/28 +213} Ke7 {-11.91/31 +124} 26. Kxc6 {+18.05/27 +215} Nb4+
{-13.59/32 +121} 27. Kc7 {+128.27/29 +212} Nd3 {-14.59/33 +116} 28. Bh4+
{+128.30/28 +215} Kf8 {-25.40/31 +113} 29. Kd6 {+128.37/41 +213} Nb2
{-250.00/34 +113}
{User adjudication} 1-0

[Event "Mac Pro x5690 3.46 Ghz 18 CPU"]
[Site "Mac-Pro.local"]
[Date "2017.06.16"]
[Round "-"]
[White "McBrain 2.5 64 POPCNT"]
[Black "Stockfish 140617 64 POPC"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "600+10"]
[FEN "1r3k2/1R1n1pp1/2p1p2p/2P5/3P4/4P3/3B1PPP/6K1 w - - 1 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

1. Rxb8+ {+1.45/38 +578} Nxb8 {-1.54/40 +559} 2. Kf1 {+1.43/35 +585} f6
{-1.62/39 +534} 3. Ke2 {+1.57/33 +585} Nd7 {-1.63/39 +540} 4. g4
{+1.66/36 +575} Ke8 {-1.63/35 +532} 5. Kd3 {+1.75/35 +575} Ke7
{-2.10/36 +485} 6. f3 {+2.41/40 +481} Kf7 {-2.30/39 +430} 7. Kc4
{+3.03/42 +407} f5 {-2.31/46 +423} 8. gxf5 {+3.13/42 +409} exf5
{-3.00/38 +426} 9. e4 {+3.14/33 +416} fxe4 {-3.49/45 +410} 10. fxe4
{+4.04/41 +383} Nf6 {-3.56/35 +417} 11. Kd3 {+4.12/28 +390} Ke7
{-4.82/41 +367} 12. h4 {+4.56/37 +389} Ke6 {-5.81/46 +340} 13. Bf4
{+4.77/38 +397} Ng4 {-6.60/48 +285} 14. Ke2 {+5.07/39 +397} Nf6
{-7.47/48 +236} 15. Ke3 {+5.25/28 +402} Nd7 {-7.46/36 +222} 16. Kd3
{+7.32/30 +401} Ke7 {-8.31/41 +200} 17. Bd6+ {+52.87/27 +400} Ke6
{-7.95/41 +187} 18. e5 {+128.38/47 +400} g6 {-128.39/51 +170} 19. Ke4
{+128.39/43 +406} g5 {-128.39/62 +162} 20. hxg5 {+128.40/49 +399} hxg5
{-128.40/70 +170} 21. Kf3 {+128.41/48 +405}
{User adjudication} 1-0


[/pgn]

it looks pretty good to me for white, but I will let the experts have the final say...
this is already going 7 to 1; previously it was 5 to 1, but now more hating people joined into the tussle.

no one going to come to my rescue?

well, Mike, you have been matching 2 different engines, certainly not the best way to proceed.

just 3 games? but then, you might not have posted the 5 drawn ones? :)

I must admit this position is completely waful for engines, as they do not have fortress detection.

in my own quick tests, I have 9 wins and 11 draws after 20 games with 10 different engines at 1' + 1''.
draws still prevail, but not by much.

looking at the games, engines simply miss some obvious fortress positions. Komodo is fully awful here. Same for SF and the rest.

why do we need to develop such engines that are completely useless for analysis? I would agree with Daniel current engine development is in a deadlock.

I am 101% sure the position is a dead draw, can demosntrate it in every possible way, but top engines might well fail here.

Anyone having doubts Carlsen would have easily drawn this?
I don't hate you Lyudmil, in fact, at first I thought you were correct. I ran just three games. Not saying you're wrong now either , but I do think the evidence might be pointing the other way. I'm admire your tenacity for sticking to your belief , but I would probably admire you even more if you were to admit that perhaps you error. Anyway , it's all good man, certainly a good position to analyze more deeply. 😊

Post Reply