I think that it is dependent on the type of the position.Rolf wrote:This is correct. You found it. Now I dont remember if Kosteniuk played it quickly or not. I remember faintly that she played it although g4 was already as the absolute hammer move on the display. Next question, why I still wrote the message after move 36.Rxh7 and not so logically take the difference between g4 and Qg3 so seriously. I think I argued to myself that the played Qg3 isnt a losing move at all neither one with a negative evaluation. It's just not the absolute top move.Uri Blass wrote: Rybka does not play 28.Qg3 and prefers 28.g4(except fast time control)
and I used slow PIV.
Since you showed this the question could be asked if a player of her strength who relied on outside help in positions where she had really to find the only possible positive move when all others wouldnt just lose directly but would have got a negative evaluation. But perhaps, Uri, it's already wrong to speak of ONLY moves, if it's only displayed as the only move with a minimal positive value.
I see, this could be the nature of my wrong judgement. I relied too much on sophisticated perhaps empty differences in the eval of a machine where a real GM possible wouldnt see a relevant difference at all.
Perhaps this is the crux of these top machines in chess. We, the majority of very weak players or experts as we like to call us as non-masters we get irrationally misled by the facticity of output numbers who could in real also be presented with different flowers. But there is no proven or reliable truth in such small differences of deci-numbers.
What do you think?
Still we could try to research if it's common that such non-superGM players have so many machine-approved moves in their games. Perhaps others now could become interested?
I believe that we can easily find cases when even non GM's have rybka's moves for 14 moves.
part of these moves are clearly forced moves that are easy even for me to play and some moves are tactics that I may miss but I am not 2500 player.
I have 2035 fide rating and here are my comments after analysis with rybka:
23.axb5 is obvious capture
24.Nxb5 is also an obvious recapture(not forced but I see no reason not to play it and I expect most 2000 players to follow moves 23-24)
I believe that 25.Bd3 is also human natural choice(humans can think about the idea Bd3 and Qxh7 mate.
26.Rh4 is also a natural human move(threats Rxh7+)
27.Be2 is the only good escape for the bishop(27.Bc4 d5 is easy even for me to see)
28.Qg3 is not suggested
29.c4 is natural move to protect the white knight because black threats it.
The only alternative is Qxd6 but it is easy for 2500 player to see the line
Qxd6 Qxd6 Rxd6 Nd5 that threats both the rook at h4 and the bishop at e3
30.cxb5 is obvious recapture.
move 31 is also not hard for 2500 player who is careful not to fall into traps.
main alternative was trying to win a pawn by
31.Bxb6 Qxb6 but here 32.Qxd6 Qf2 is an easy fork for 2500 player to see.
Less easy is 32.Rxd6 Rc8 with the idea Rc1 mate and Rc2 when black get the advantage and I could probably blunder by that move in a game but
I am not close to 2500.
32.Bxd6 is one of many options to consider.
33.Qf4 is the best but also natural move.
34.Qc1 and 35.Qd2 are forced tactically.
It is not trivial tactics for 2000 players but I guess that it is tactics that 2500 players usually see.
Uri