Peter Osterlund wrote:
Martin Brown writes:
Sanny wrote:
That game was played by EASY level. Heres a game by Advance Level
where Zebediah gave lots of sacrifices and win the game in just 34
moves.
In this game Zebediah was a knight ahead but later sacrificed its
knight to bring a quick end.
You mean that Getclub gifted him a knight and then played like a
patzer. This play is basically insane. There is something wrong with
either the evaluation function or the search algorithm.
I think the quiescence search is either not implemented at all or
somehow broken.
My instinct too. Some moves are otherwise inexplicable.
Just for fun, I played a game between GetClub (running
on a 2.4GHz Core2 CPU) and my mobile phone (I think it has a 400MHz
ARM CPU). I expected my phone to be tactically outplayed, but the
exact opposite happened. Here is the game:
Looking at Shredders computer analysis it is clear that the mobile phone
always had a deeper effective search than GetClub.
About what nominal rating is Glofiish chess?
[White "GetClub beginner level 10-20s/move"]
[Black "Glofiish X800, 15s/move"]
[Result "0-1"]
Yippee! Header data that will import into a CB chess engine..
1. Nc3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. Bf4 e6 4. g3 Bb4 5. Bg2 Ne4 6. Bxe4 dxe4
You have to wonder why it played BxN - cramping your own position is not
usually a good idea. I wonder if it thought 7. Nxe4 was possible (ie did
not see that the N was pinned in calculating the exchange)
Something harmless to continue developing like Bd2 would have been fine.
7. e3 g5 8. Be5
O-O 9. g4 Nc6 10. Bg3 e5
GetClub is steadily outplayed by an engine that sees deeper here.
10. a3 would be a better continuation. The line played helps black.
11. d5 Ne7 12. Bxe5 Nxd5 13. Qe2 Re8
We have to wonder why it thought 13. Qe2 was a good idea. It isn't.
h3,h4,a3,Kf1 would all be better (the position is already lost)
14. f4 exf3
ANother helpmate move. Not quite terminal but it greatly assists black.
I think a3 is obviously best with Bd4 or even O-O-O plausible.
15. Nxf3 Bxc3+ 16. bxc3 Bxg4 17. Bd4 c5
17. c4 looks better to me.
18. Bxc5 Nf4 19. Qf1 Qd5
Qd2 is better
20. Nxg5 Ng2+
21. Kf2 Qxc5 22. Kxg2 Qxg5 23. h4 Bf3+
OK. This position needs careful examination. The only viable move here
is Rg1 and I would expect most engines to find it. Anything else leads
inexorably to a mate. h4 is a mate in 10.
Interestingly this particular position produces one of the widest
spectrums of mate detected cutoffs I have seen from Shredder. Does
anyone know how to interpret them?
namely at 18 ply overnight infinite analysis
Rg1 -11.4
Qg1 -#211
e4 -#201
Qc1, Re1 -#177
h4 -#176
h3,Qd3 -#175
Qf4 -#172
Qe1, Qf2, Qe2 -#150
Qf3 -#149
(all the others are resolved to very quick mates)
NB it is odd that h4 stays at -#176 at 18 ply although after playing
"h4" explicitly the engine quickly finds the mate in 10.
24. Kf2 Qxe3+ 25. Kg3 Bc6+ 26. Kh2 Qe5+
27. Kh3 Qe6+ 28. Kg3 Qd6+ 0-1
I presume here that beginner level resigned when the mate came within
its event horizon (which seems surprisingly shallow).
I guess that beginner level isn't intentionally making bad moves,
therefore my guess is a broken quiescence search.
I am not sure. It is hard to decide what it thinks it is doing.
Sanny writes:
6. e2-e4{104} Nf6-e4{1978}
And now the final coup de grace. Suicide chess anyone ???
No it gives 2 points for killing 2 Center pawns and other 1 point for
white King Comming out unprotected. and Look at White position its
none of the pieces is developed.
Sanny what is the granularity of your evaluation function? You keep
talking about integral numbers of pawns as if that is the finest division.
Why a whole point for the unprotected king? Wouldn't a smaller value,
like 0.25 be better?
That is probably about right. Unless there is a forcing mate sequence -
some tricks for quickly breaking open a castled king rely on rook
sacrifice followed by a forcing sequence of checks to mate.
Regards,
Martin Brown
** Posted from
http://www.teranews.com **