Analysis help for those with the processing power

[AW~]

r1bq1rk1/1pppbppp/p1n5/4P3/B2Nn3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w - - 1 9
(1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. O-O Be7 7. e5 Ne4 8. Nxd4 O-O)

Hi,
I was wondering what the feedback would be for the above position.
I think, the engine I use, S_Xpro with 3 cores, just wonders to no end for zero evals with no draws by repetition.
I was curious about a line from the A0 paper which had mentioned 4...Be7, and so I figure the above position would be the only hope of defeating 4...Nf6. I figure 9 Nf5 is the best move, as played by some recent human games, but wonder if there is anything besides question marks.

[Dann Corbit]

r1bq1rk1/1pppbppp/p1n5/4P3/B2Nn3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w - - 1 9
(1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. O-O Be7 7. e5 Ne4 8. Nxd4 O-O)

Hi,
I was wondering what the feedback would be for the above position.
I think, the engine I use, S_Xpro with 3 cores, just wonders to no end for zero evals with no draws by repetition.
I was curious about a line from the A0 paper which had mentioned 4...Be7, and so I figure the above position would be the only hope of defeating 4...Nf6. I figure 9 Nf5 is the best move, as played by some recent human games, but wonder if there is anything besides question marks.

For your key position [d]r1bq1rk1/1pppbppp/p1n5/4P3/B2Nn3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w - -
This is shallow analysis, so take it a bit tongue in cheek. At a depth of 37 SF choose Bf4 with a score of zero, so very drawish.
The generally preferred move is Nf5, but it does not fare well, as black wins more often than white in actual games played.

r1bq1rk1/1pppbppp/p1n5/4P3/B2Nn3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w - - acd 37; acs 191; bm Bf4; c3 "Nf5"; cce -44; ce 0; pm Nf5 {296} Re1 {141} Bf4 {33} c3 {30} Qe2 {25} c4 {11} Bxc6 {9} Nxc6 {9} Nf3 {1} Qg4 {1}; pv Bf4 Nc5 c3 Nxd4 cxd4 Nxa4 Qxa4 b5 Qb3 d6 Rd1 Bb7 Nd2 dxe5 Bxe5 Qd5 Qxd5 Bxd5 Bxc7 Rac8 Rdc1 Bg5 Ba5 Bf6 Bb6 Bg5; white_wins 116; black_wins 161; draws 177; Opening ECO:C84k; Spanish: Closed, Centre Attack, 7.e5 Ne4 8.Nxd4 O-O; 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.d4 exd4 7.e5 Ne4 8.Nxd4 O-O *;

[Dann Corbit]

A bit deeper analysis with multi-pv shows that the top 3 move choices are all very drawish, at least according to Stockfish:

Code: Select all

    40/28	06:20	3,661,563,370	9,623,587	 0.00	Re1 Nxd4 Qxd4 Nc5 Nc3 d6 exd6 Bxd6 Be3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bd5 c6 Be4 Qc7 g3 Rad8 Bg2 Ne6 Qb6 Qc8 Ne4 Bc7 Qa7 Bb8 Qb6
    40/53	06:20	3,661,563,370	9,623,587	 0.00	Nf5 d5 Nxe7+ Nxe7 c3 Nc5 Bc2 Bf5 Na3 Re8 Bg5 Qd7 Bxe7 Rxe7 Qd4 Ne6 Qd2 Nc5 Qe3
    40/22	06:20	3,661,563,370	9,623,587	 0.00	Bf4 Nxd4 Qxd4 Nc5 Bb3 Ne6 Qe4 Nxf4 Qxf4 d6 Nc3 c6 exd6 Bxd6 Qf3 Be5 Rfe1 Qf6 Qe3 Bf4 Qf3

[jdart]

It is always interesting to see what the correspondence players choose (since they have days to analyze). Generally Re1 or Nf5 in this position, although this whole line is not common recently. One recent game:

[pgn] [Event "WS/GMN/62"] [Site "ICCF"] [Date "2018.03.03"] [Round "?"] [White "Gonzaga Grego, Luís"] [Black "Cavajda, Ivan"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "C84"] [WhiteElo "2401"] [BlackElo "2470"] [PlyCount "47"] [EventDate "2018.??.??"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. O-O Be7 7. e5 Ne4 8. Nxd4 O-O 9. Re1 Nxd4 10. Qxd4 Nc5 11. Nc3 d6 12. exd6 Bxd6 13. Be3 Bf5 14. Bb3 Re8 15. Rad1 Nxb3 16. cxb3 h6 17. h3 Qe7 18. Re2 Qe5 19. Qxe5 Rxe5 20. g4 Bd7 21. Bf4 Rxe2 22. Nxe2 Bxf4 23. Nxf4 Bc6 24. Nd5 1/2-1/2 [/pgn]

[Uri]

A bit deeper analysis with multi-pv shows that the top 3 move choices are all very drawish, at least according to Stockfish:

I wouldn't trust Stockfish.

Stockfish still has many weaknesses in its evaluations. For example I noticed that many times Stockfish weakens his own kingside which is not good. King safety is important and Stockfish doesn't know that.

[zullil]

A bit deeper analysis with multi-pv shows that the top 3 move choices are all very drawish, at least according to Stockfish:

Code: Select all

    40/28	06:20	3,661,563,370	9,623,587	 0.00	Re1 Nxd4 Qxd4 Nc5 Nc3 d6 exd6 Bxd6 Be3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bd5 c6 Be4 Qc7 g3 Rad8 Bg2 Ne6 Qb6 Qc8 Ne4 Bc7 Qa7 Bb8 Qb6
    40/53	06:20	3,661,563,370	9,623,587	 0.00	Nf5 d5 Nxe7+ Nxe7 c3 Nc5 Bc2 Bf5 Na3 Re8 Bg5 Qd7 Bxe7 Rxe7 Qd4 Ne6 Qd2 Nc5 Qe3
    40/22	06:20	3,661,563,370	9,623,587	 0.00	Bf4 Nxd4 Qxd4 Nc5 Bb3 Ne6 Qe4 Nxf4 Qxf4 d6 Nc3 c6 exd6 Bxd6 Qf3 Be5 Rfe1 Qf6 Qe3 Bf4 Qf3

An even deeper search reveals that Cfish-dev has a very small preference for Nf5:

0.00 9. Nf5 d5 10. Nxe7+ Nxe7 11. c3 Nc5 12. Bc2 Bf5 13. Na3 Qd7 14. Be3 Ne6 15. Qe2 f6 16. exf6 Rxf6 17. Rad1 c6 18. f3 Raf8 19. Bb3 b5 20. c4 bxc4 21. Nxc4 Ng6 22. Qd2 Qc7 23. Na5 Nh4 24. Rf2 Kh8 25. Qb4 Nxg2 26. Kxg2 c5 27. Qc3 d4 28. Bxd4 Bh3+ 29. Kh1 cxd4 30. Qxc7 Nxc7 31. Bc4 Bg4 32. Rxd4 Bxf3+ 33. Kg1 Rg6+ 34. Kf1 Rgf6 (depth 58, 8:48:04)

-0.09 9. Bf4 Nc5 10. Nc3 Nxd4 11. Qxd4 Ne6 12. Qe3 Nxf4 13. Qxf4 d5 14. exd6 Bxd6 15. Qf3 Be5 16. Rae1 Qd6 17. h3 Qf6 18. Qxf6 Bxf6 19. Bb3 Bd7 20. Nd5 Bxb2 21. Re7 Rad8 22. Rd1 Bc6 23. Rxc7 Ba3 24. Rd3 Rde8 25. Ne3 Bb4 26. Bd5 Bxd5 27. Rxd5 b6 28. Rd1 Bc5 29. Nd5 Re2 30. Rxc5 bxc5 31. Ne3 f6 32. Kf1 Rxe3 33. fxe3 Rb8 34. Rd6 Rb2 35. Rxa6 Rxc2 36. a4 Ra2 37. Rc6 Rxa4 38. Rxc5 Kf7 39. Rc1 Kg6 40. Ke2 Ra3 41. Rc7 h6 42. e4 Ra2+ 43. Kf3 Rb2 (depth 58, 8:48:04)

-0.09 9. Re1 Nxd4 10. Qxd4 Nc5 11. Nc3 d6 12. Bb3 c6 13. exd6 Qxd6 14. Qxd6 Bxd6 15. Be3 Nxb3 16. cxb3 Bf5 17. f3 Rfe8 18. Kf2 Bc7 19. Na4 b5 20. Nc5 a5 21. g3 h5 22. Rac1 Be5 23. Re2 g6 24. Rd2 Red8 25. Rcd1 Rxd2+ 26. Rxd2 Bg7 27. Ne4 b4 28. Rc2 a4 29. Rxc6 axb3 30. axb3 Bxb2 31. Rc4 Bxe4 32. fxe4 Bc3 33. Bc5 Ra2+ 34. Kg1 Kg7 35. Bxb4 Be5 36. Bc3 Bxc3 37. Rxc3 Rd2 38. Rc6 Rb2 39. Rc7 Rxb3 40. e5 Rb1+ 41. Kg2 Rb2+ 42. Kf3 (depth 58, 8:48:04)

[yanquis1972]

A bit deeper analysis with multi-pv shows that the top 3 move choices are all very drawish, at least according to Stockfish:

I wouldn't trust Stockfish.

Stockfish still has many weaknesses in its evaluations. For example I noticed that many times Stockfish weakens his own kingside which is not good. King safety is important and Stockfish doesn't know that.

I don’t know if these posts are intended to be some kind of satire but they strike me as completely useless

[Werewolf]

A bit deeper analysis with multi-pv shows that the top 3 move choices are all very drawish, at least according to Stockfish:

I wouldn't trust Stockfish.

Stockfish still has many weaknesses in its evaluations. For example I noticed that many times Stockfish weakens his own kingside which is not good. King safety is important and Stockfish doesn't know that.

I don’t know if these posts are intended to be some kind of satire but they strike me as completely useless

Agreed.

[AW~]

Thanks!....still zeros it is for the holy grail type quest. I did look at it again with the latest update and confirmed that 9 c4 has no chance so at least that can be ruled out. Id say the favorite is 9 Nf5 d5 10 Nxe7 Nxe7 11 c3 Nc5 12 Bc2 Bf5 ...and then the *latest* appears to be 13 b4 Bxc2 14 Qxc2 Ne6 15 f4.

Still zeros though, but at least white has some action with being one bishop vs knight up and the kingside pawn majority....and the evals being slightly negative at lower depths. Plus with every update those evals are moving better for white every so slowly. Not even close to enough for any top level engine to lose to currently of course. Im just going with A0 says 4..Nf6 is not ideal. At the same time I think that would have stuck out to any chess player and the NN team would have revealed such news.

[Dann Corbit]

A bit deeper analysis with multi-pv shows that the top 3 move choices are all very drawish, at least according to Stockfish:

I wouldn't trust Stockfish.

Stockfish still has many weaknesses in its evaluations. For example I noticed that many times Stockfish weakens his own kingside which is not good. King safety is important and Stockfish doesn't know that.

I don’t know if these posts are intended to be some kind of satire but they strike me as completely useless

Agreed.

Uri is someone I listen to carefully.
He was correspondence champion of Israel.
He wrote a successful chess engine.
I guess that if Uri says that SF has a tendency to weaken his own kingside, it is probably right.
On the other hand, the opinion of SF is probably better than the opinion of a super GM 98% of the time.