Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

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

Moderator: Ras

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov »

zullil wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
zullil wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: Rab6

[d]1r1b4/5q1k/1r2n1p1/p2bPp1p/B1pP1P1P/2P4N/R4Q1K/2B3R1 w - - 0 3
SF plays Ng5+ with evaluation 0.
[d]1r1b4/5q1k/1r2n1p1/p2bPpNp/B1pP1P1P/2P5/R4Q1K/2B3R1 b - - 23 14
Ng5

[d]1r1b4/5q1k/1r4p1/p2bPpnp/B1pP1P1P/2P5/R4Q1K/2B3R1 w - - 0 4
I guess you were hoping for SF's last move. It surprised me, but SF stuck with it to depth 51. SF also considered Bc2 and Bd1, but chose the knight move. Let's see where this goes...
Do not bother, everything loses.
zullil
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:31 am
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by zullil »

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: Do not bother, everything loses.
OK. SF plays hxg5 and resigns. Its evaluation is still 0.
[d]1r1b4/5q1k/1r4p1/p2bPpPp/B1pP1P2/2P5/R4Q1K/2B3R1 b - - 0 15

Shall we play on, just a bit, to see SF recognize that it is lost?
Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov »

zullil wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: Do not bother, everything loses.
OK. SF plays hxg5 and resigns. Its evaluation is still 0.
[d]1r1b4/5q1k/1r4p1/p2bPpPp/B1pP1P2/2P5/R4Q1K/2B3R1 b - - 0 15

Shall we play on, just a bit, to see SF recognize that it is lost?
Rb3

[d]1r1b4/5q1k/6p1/p2bPpPp/B1pP1P2/1rP5/R4Q1K/2B3R1 w - - 0 5

SF is the first engine I see that resigns with a 0.0 score. :)

I more or less checked the main lines thoroughly, and black has winning advantage in all, when I check them calmly, but, unfortunately, when I get under pressure this time around, I simply can not concentrate properly, quite probably because of external factors, never mind.

So that, I am certain the position is won, but am not at all certain I will be able to win it...

Such a crazy situation, of course we will play on, fiat iusticia, ruat ceolum.
peter
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:38 am
Full name: Peter Martan

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by peter »

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: fiat iusticia, ruat ceolum.
:lol:

You mistyped caelum, Lyudmil, but the really funny thing to me is this: almost exactly 20 moves after your "winner" 31...Ra6 instead of Smyslov's Rb3 you still have nothing better then the hope SF could blunder like Gligoric did back in 1959 with taking this sac.

You are really funny, Lyudmil, no harm meant!
:)
Peter.
peter
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:38 am
Full name: Peter Martan

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by peter »

And it could come even better: one move later, eg. after 51.Bb2 Qb7 SF might even really take 52.Bxb3 and it could still hold the draw because you simply shouldn't have shuffled around these 20 moves to much, so that it could be too late now even for what Smyslov managed to gain 20 moves and 56 years sooner.
:)
Peter.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov »

peter wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: fiat iusticia, ruat ceolum.
:lol:

You mistyped caelum, Lyudmil, but the really funny thing to me is this: almost exactly 20 moves after your "winner" 31...Ra6 instead of Smyslov's Rb3 you still have nothing better then the hope SF could blunder like Gligoric did back in 1959 with taking this sac.

You are really funny, Lyudmil, no harm meant!
:)
Those are doubles, you might want to check this:
http://latinlexicon.org/paradigms.php?p1=1001977

So, you might say both cealum, and coelum.

When I learned a bit of Latin, my handbook should have said coelum, instead of caelum.

Anyway, even if it did not say so, I would still say coelum, simply because I like the combination of o and e in the above word better than a and e.

Concerning the game, it is still not over...
zullil
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:31 am
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by zullil »

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: Rb3

[d]1r1b4/5q1k/6p1/p2bPpPp/B1pP1P2/1rP5/R4Q1K/2B3R1 w - - 0 5
OK, SF likes Bb2 with evaluation still at 0.
[d]1r1b4/5q1k/6p1/p2bPpPp/B1pP1P2/1rP5/RB3Q1K/6R1 b - - 2 16
peter
Posts: 3393
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:38 am
Full name: Peter Martan

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by peter »

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: Concerning the game, it is still not over...
It is, Lyudmil, it is since quite a while, you just didn't realize when it happened, and when the horse you went on riding died quietly beneath your butt, I guess that was about 20 moves ago...
:)
Peter.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6052
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov »

zullil wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: Rb3

[d]1r1b4/5q1k/6p1/p2bPpPp/B1pP1P2/1rP5/R4Q1K/2B3R1 w - - 0 5
OK, SF likes Bb2 with evaluation still at 0.
[d]1r1b4/5q1k/6p1/p2bPpPp/B1pP1P2/1rP5/RB3Q1K/6R1 b - - 2 16
Be4

[d]1r1b4/5q1k/6p1/p3PpPp/B1pPbP2/1rP5/RB3Q1K/6R1 w - - 0 6
zullil
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:31 am
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Gligoric-Smyslov, 1959

Post by zullil »

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: Be4

[d]1r1b4/5q1k/6p1/p3PpPp/B1pPbP2/1rP5/RB3Q1K/6R1 w - - 0 6
Re1 with evaluation 0.
[d]1r1b4/5q1k/6p1/p3PpPp/B1pPbP2/1rP5/RB3Q1K/4R3 b - - 4 17