Did Hiarcs7.32 play that blunder?

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

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

Uri Blass
Posts: 10424
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Tel-Aviv Israel

Did Hiarcs7.32 play that blunder?

Post by Uri Blass »

I found in the following site the following correspondence game between hiarcs and GM Christophe Léotard(now the world champion)
I remember that hiarc7.32 was used

I cannot believe that a computer(even some years ago) could do the blunder c5 in correspondence game and I wonder if hiarcs7.32 really plays c5 here with faster hardware after an hour of search.

Hiarcs7.32 is not installed in the machine that I use.
Can somebody with fast hardware check if hiarcs7.32 plays the blunder after an hour and if the problem was fixed with later versions?

[D]1r4k1/p1p1r3/7p/1p3R1Q/8/3Pq1P1/P6P/5R1K b - - 0 32

[Event "240'/40+240'/20+240'"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "New game"]
[Black "agur"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "75"]
[TimeControl "40/14400:20/14400:14400"]

{512MB, Junior9.ctg, URI-AMD} 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. g3 Bb4 5. Bg2
d6 6. O-O O-O 7. d3 Be6 8. Bg5 Bxc3 9. bxc3 h6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11. Ne1 Rab8 12.
Rb1 Rfd8 13. Nc2 d5 14. cxd5 Bxd5 15. Bxd5 Rxd5 16. Ne3 Rdd8 17. Qa4 Qe6 18.
Rb2 b6 19. Qe4 g6 20. f4 f5 21. Qa4 Re8 22. Ng2 Qd6 23. e4 Qc5+ 24. Rbf2 Qxc3
25. exf5 gxf5 26. Ne3 b5 27. Qd1 Ne7 28. fxe5 Qxe5 29. Nxf5 Nxf5 30. Rxf5 Qe3+
31. Kh1 Re7 32. Qh5 c5 33. Rf6 Rd8 34. Rxh6 Qd4 35. Rf5 Qa1+ 36. Kg2 Qxa2+ 37.
Kh3 Qa1 38. Rg5+ *
Chris Taylor

Re: Did Hiarcs7.32 play that blunder?

Post by Chris Taylor »

Uri

I have put the position on an AMD FX57, will report back soon.

When I left it was looking at Rg7.......

We will see later


Chris
Chris Taylor

Re: Did Hiarcs7.32 play that blunder?

Post by Chris Taylor »

New game
1r4k1/p1p1r3/7p/1p3R1Q/8/3Pq1P1/P6P/5R1K b - - 0 1

Analysis by Hiarcs 7.32: AMD FX57

1...Qe6 2.Rf6 Qe3 3.Rxh6 Qd4 4.Qg6+ Qg7
² (0.34) Depth: 1 00:00:00
+- (1.95) Depth: 5/21 00:00:00 91kN
1...Rbe8 2.R5f4 Qe6 3.Rf6 Qe2 4.Qxb5
± (1.25) Depth: 5/21 00:00:00 128kN
1...c5 2.Rf6 Rd8 3.Rxh6 Qd4 4.Rg6+
± (0.97) Depth: 5/21 00:00:00 217kN
+- (1.80) Depth: 8/27 00:00:29 12917kN
1...Rg7 2.Rxb5 Rxb5 3.Qxb5 c5 4.Qc4+ Kh8 5.Rf5 Qe2 6.Qxc5 Qxd3 7.Qf2
+- (1.60) Depth: 8/27 00:01:28 39402kN
+- (1.64) Depth: 9/27 00:01:54 51438kN
1...Rd8 2.Rf7
+- (1.59) Depth: 9/29 00:02:53 77130kN
+- (1.84) Depth: 10/30 00:04:09 113mN
1...Rg7 2.Rxb5 Rxb5 3.Qxb5 Re7 4.Qa6 Qe2 5.Kg1 Qe3+ 6.Rf2 Qe1+ 7.Rf1 Qe3+ 8.Kg2
+- (1.64) Depth: 10/30 00:05:27 151mN
+- (1.59) Depth: 12/30 00:47:11 1277mN

(Taylor, Notts 17.04.2007) It was on just short of two hours!

Chris
Jim Walker
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Did Hiarcs7.32 play that blunder?

Post by Jim Walker »

My Hiarcs 7.32 shows different analysis (XP3100/256M hash). It selects c5 and holds it for about 2' 30". I don't know if it will come back to that or not. Is it possible that the user only ran it for a few minutes to check for blunders only.
Jim
Uri Blass
Posts: 10424
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Tel-Aviv Israel

Re: Did Hiarcs7.32 play that blunder?

Post by Uri Blass »

Chris Taylor wrote:New game
1r4k1/p1p1r3/7p/1p3R1Q/8/3Pq1P1/P6P/5R1K b - - 0 1

Analysis by Hiarcs 7.32: AMD FX57

1...Qe6 2.Rf6 Qe3 3.Rxh6 Qd4 4.Qg6+ Qg7
² (0.34) Depth: 1 00:00:00
+- (1.95) Depth: 5/21 00:00:00 91kN
1...Rbe8 2.R5f4 Qe6 3.Rf6 Qe2 4.Qxb5
± (1.25) Depth: 5/21 00:00:00 128kN
1...c5 2.Rf6 Rd8 3.Rxh6 Qd4 4.Rg6+
± (0.97) Depth: 5/21 00:00:00 217kN
+- (1.80) Depth: 8/27 00:00:29 12917kN
1...Rg7 2.Rxb5 Rxb5 3.Qxb5 c5 4.Qc4+ Kh8 5.Rf5 Qe2 6.Qxc5 Qxd3 7.Qf2
+- (1.60) Depth: 8/27 00:01:28 39402kN
+- (1.64) Depth: 9/27 00:01:54 51438kN
1...Rd8 2.Rf7
+- (1.59) Depth: 9/29 00:02:53 77130kN
+- (1.84) Depth: 10/30 00:04:09 113mN
1...Rg7 2.Rxb5 Rxb5 3.Qxb5 Re7 4.Qa6 Qe2 5.Kg1 Qe3+ 6.Rf2 Qe1+ 7.Rf1 Qe3+ 8.Kg2
+- (1.64) Depth: 10/30 00:05:27 151mN
+- (1.59) Depth: 12/30 00:47:11 1277mN

(Taylor, Notts 17.04.2007) It was on just short of two hours!

Chris
Thanks
I know that only old hardware was used for the games against that correspondence GM but it seems that this was not the only reason for the blunder.

Uri