ChessBanter

Analysis of Huebner- Petrosian IZ 1976

Jürgen R. — Tue, 13 May 2008 13:34:26 GMT

Biel Interzonal 1976, round 18, next to last,
position after White's 35. move:
2r5/PP2R1PK/3n2NP/5P2/1Q1B1p2/6p1/6bp/5q1k b

The moves up to this point had been:

[Event "Biel Interzonal"]
[Site "Biel"]
[Date "1976.08.04"]
[Round "18"]
[White "Huebner, Robert"]
[Black "Petrosian, Tigran V"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B06"]
[WhiteElo "2585"]
[BlackElo "2635"]

1. Nf3 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. d4 d6 4. Bc4 e6 5. Bb3 Ne7 6. O-O O-O 7. c3 b6 8.
Nbd2
Nbc6 9. Re1 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. Nf1 Nac6 12. Be3 Qc7 13. Rc1 e5 14. h3 Nd8
15.
N3h2 Bb7 16. Ng3 exd4 17. cxd4 Ne6 18. Bb3 d5 19. e5 Nc6 20. Ng4 Rfd8 21.
dxc5
bxc5 22. Bxc5 Nxc5 23. Rxc5 Qe7 24. Qc1 Rac8 25. Nf6+ Kh8 26. Nxd5 Qf8 27.
Qe3
Nxe5 28. Rxc8 Rxc8 29. Qxa7 Bxd5 30. Bxd5 Qb4 31. Re2 f5 32. Qb7 Rc1+ 33.
Kh2
Qf8 34. f4 Nd3 35. Qb5

Black has about 5 min in the clock, White about 15.

At this point Black is completely lost. However, his next
move is a surprise that looks like a real tactical threat for about 2
seconds. Petrosian's entire demeanor, when making this move
said:"Now I have won."

35. -- Bd4

What the audience didn't know is that the real game wasn't being played
on the chess board at all. The story, can be verified
from the original KGB documents*.

Huebner, had been warned by the Soviets, who were
trying to maximize the chances of their vastly overrated
contingent: Petrosian, Tal, Smyslov - all of them over the
hill. So he knows he cannot risk beating Petrosian: in a number
of calls from the Embassy of the USSR in Berne Abelard
was mentioned. Therefore, Huebner looks for the most
passive move that eliminates the spurious threats:

36. Nh1

Great square for a Knight when you must not win -
and objectively possibly the best move.

36. -- Qd6

Petrosian strengthens his attack. Now white can win
the Q or mate in in 4 (37. Qe8 etc), but Petrosian
knows that Huebner knows what they will do to
him if he wins, and that's why Huebner plays

37. g3

And that does it (37. Kg7). White's advantage is gone, but so
are his worries about dire consequences.

37 -- Nxf4

But what is this? Petrolium doesn't want the present!
The reason is this: he was just passed a note, hidden
in a Yoghurt cup, that reminded him that Allen Dulles'
organization still resided at Spiegelgasse 14 in
Zurich and that they were watching live on closed
circuit TV, relayed through Langley, VA.

Huebner immediately understands what has
happened, and for a second thinks that he has
protection in McLean, and therefore plays

38. Qe8+

which is not dreadful, but there isn't any mate
any more.

38. -- Kg7 39. Re7+ Kh6

Bang. Suddenly it occurred to Huebner that neither
the ghost of Allen Dulles, nor the spooks in McLean
have the slightest interest in him. Now he is losing
the game but his kneecaps will not be broken and
his balls will not be cut off.

40. Nf2 Bxf2 41. Rxh7 Kg5 0-1

So Petrosian seems to have won the game but
he was not with us much longer. He died when he
was 55 and in 200 years when the archives in
McLean, VA, will be opened we will find out how
he was done in.

Coming soon: Interpretation of Castro - Petrosian, Biel 1976

Strongest?

jkh001@aim.com — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:54:34 GMT

"Alekhine's Parrot" (that quacking fowl Phil Innes) writes at the
_Chessville Weekly_:

"Coming up later this Year � Strongest ever US Tournament.

"September 19th to 28th sees a [so far] Category 15 tournament on US
soil in the 10 player SPICE CUP. Seven of the 10 invitees have
already signed up, and I understand average Elo is currently 2600."

Question: Is it really plausible to claim that this tournament is/will
be stronger than New York 1927, or the 1st and 2nd Piatigorsky Cups?
("Highest category" would be correct, but that's not what he wrote.)

MTel Masters 2008 - Ivanchuk beat them all...

Kidon — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:32:06 GMT

Ivanchuk is fantastic at MTel Masters 2008 and beats all his opponents
in first tie of the tournament.
Source, shots and standings: http://en.chessfish.com/modules/news...hp?storyid=636

Paul Morphy (Funny Spoof on 1858 European Travels)

RookHouse — Mon, 12 May 2008 14:56:21 GMT

I came across this humorous article from an old Harper�s Weekly
newspaper. It portrays Paul Morphy as �Jack the Giant-Killer� and
gives a spoof on his adventures in Europe in 1858.

http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=202

Thanks,
Morphy
www.rookhouse.com

Re: The Future of Chess and Getting It "Unstuck"

Chess One[_2_] — Mon, 12 May 2008 14:02:03 GMT

"Rich Hutnik" > wrote in message
...
> On May 8, 12:16 am, Ed Murphy > wrote:
>> wrote:
>> > On May 7, 9:32 am, David Richerby >
>> > wrote:
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>> On Apr 18, 10:18=A0pm, John Bailey >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> In [Deutsch's] paper, the convenience of thinking that all
>> >>>> computing can be reduced to an equivalentTuringmachine is
>> >>>> considered and rejected.http://xyz.lanl.gov/abs/math.HO/9911150"As
>> >>>> a matter of fact, Richard Feynman, in his talk during the First
>> >>>> Conference on the Physics of Computation held at MIT in 1981,
>> >>>> observed that it appears to be impossible to simulate a general
>> >>>> quantum evolution on a classical probabilistic computer in an
>> >>>> efficient way.
>> >>> That is largely because the only thing Feynman knew about computers
>> >>> or computations was main frame computers. But since most of today's
>> >>> computations depend on massively parellel networks, not mainframes,
>> >>> his observation mostly concern 1950s Burroughs history, not
>> >>> computers.
>> >> No. Combining two classical computers together makes a computer twice
>> >> as big that can do (roughly) twice as much work in a given time.
>> >> Connecting two quantum computers would make a computer twice as big
>> >> that can do (roughly) the square of the amount of work in a given
>> >> time.
>>
>> >> Networking classical computers together gives you at best linear
>> >> growth; adding qubits to your quantum computer gives exponential
>> >> growth.
>>
>> > Networking classical computers gives you microcomputers,
>> > laserdisks,
>> > satellites,, HDTV, Holograms, fiber optics, robots, and a
>> > paycheck,
>> > rather than idiots like computer scientists, that's why they were
>> > invented.
>>
>> You guys are speaking rather orthogonally. In theory (his topic),
>> quantum computers could do all this and more. In practice (yours),
>> adding more qubits is (so far) Really Difficult; it will take a
>> major technological breakthrough to build a quantum computer with
>> enough qubits that a network of classical computers can't simulate
>> it at full speed.
>
> The original topic had to do with the future of chess, and where it
> might head. This then spawned "Hereclitian-Calvinball" as a question
> of whether or not there is a finite or infinite number of potential
> chess variants. Maybe Quantum Computing can answer this question.

But isn't the [gigantic] fly in the ointment the fact that parrallelism to
increase brute-force solutions is still a very questionable paradigm?

After all, the comprehension of two 1600 players does not equal that of a
2200 player.

While there may be an increase in event horizon by quantitative analysis
which may achieve some result, the 'fly' is that these are typically
quantitative assessments based on materials won/lost, aso where is the
qualitative one?

[[ IE: unless a conclusive result is achieved by brute-forcing,
[example; mate] then what does any program do when at ply 12 it sees the win
of a pawn, but costing two tempii? Perhaps it will continue for another 12
plies and discover it recovers one tempo, keeps the pawn, but loses the
initiative... ]]

Therefore what is lacking in brute-force approaches is qualitative
evaluation of /specific/ positions.

The 'fly' turns out to be a man-made one - since evaluating a tempo or other
positional factors such as initiative, are factors that the programmer
assesses, not the chess-engine. Furthermore, these assessments must
necessarily be abstracted ones, sui generis, since they are /initial/ data
programmed in the chess engine, created from mean data, as averaged
ennumerated evaluations.

As we know, many 'averages' never occur, since data sets can be heavily
polarised away from any instance of mean value - the averaged condition that
is pre-programmed may in fact, /never/ occur].

Attempts to correct qualitative analysis lie in provision of yet more data
evaluation sets, such as for middle-games, or sub-sets where 2 bishops have
an open/closed position, etc. But the program itself does not generate the
data set!

Thereby, no contextual evaluation of the worth of material/positional
factors takes place by the act of the chess engine's own calculus - and this
is the stalled point in chess computing emulations, [emulation* since the
program is merely acting on received data and not conducting its own
evaluation] and has been so for 10 years. It is so stalled, that AI
researchers gave it up as anything much useful to them.

To remove chess computing from emulation, the program needs to not only play
its own moves, but successively generate its own evaluation criteria.

Phil Innes

*Whether qualitative, or quantitative such as using opening books.

> - Rich

Paul Morphy (Funny Spoof on 1858 European Travels)

RookHouse — Mon, 12 May 2008 13:25:09 GMT

I came across this hilarious article from an old Harper�s Weekly
magazine. It portrays Paul Morphy as �Jack the Giant-Killer� and
gives a spoof on his adventures in Europe in 1858.

http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=202

Thanks,
Morphy
www.rookhouse.com

GetClub Normal Level played good moves but still lost the game.

Sanny — Mon, 12 May 2008 10:58:35 GMT

Despite playing so good game GetClub was unable to stop TuringEngine
bring its Queen.

Normal Level which thinks for 1-2 min was unable to win.

There were lot of tactics in this game GetClub managed to bring equal
position. But in the end TuringEngine advanced its pawns and get
Queen.

Game Played between turingengine and normal at GetClub.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
turingengine: (White)
normal: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?...092&game=Chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

White -- Black
(turingengine) -- (normal)

1. d2-d4{4} d7-d5{0}
2. c2-c4{2} e7-e6{0}
3. Nb1-c3{4} Ng8-f6{0}
4. c4-d5{2} e6-d5{0}
5. Bc1-g5{2} Nb8-c6{96}
6. e2-e3{14} Bc8-e6{140}
7. Bf1-b5{44} Bf8-b4{146}
8. Qd1-a4{14} Be6-d7{154}
9. Ng1-e2{24} a7-a6{108}
10. Bb5-c6{8} Bb4-c3{186}
11. Ne2-c3{6} Bd7-c6{80}
12. Qa4-b3{22} Ke8-g8{116}
13. Bg5-f6{14} Qd8-f6{166}
14. Nc3-d5{6} Qf6-g5{162}
15. Nd5-f4{12} Bc6-g2{96}
16. Rh1-g1{14} Qg5-a5{102}
17. Qb3-c3{228} Qa5-c3{0}
18. b2-c3{2} Bg2-e4{108}
19. Ke1-e2{34} c7-c5{164}
20. f2-f3{10} Be4-g6{150}
21. e3-e4{28} c5-d4{90}
22. c3-d4{16} Rf8-d8{126}
23. d4-d5{42} Ra8-c8{94}
24. Rg1-c1{14} f7-f5{84}
25. Nf4-g6{42} h7-g6{132}
26. Ke2-e3{412} Rd8-f8{138}
27. e4-e5{82} Rc8-d8{96}
28. Ke3-d4{10} Rd8-d7{102}
29. Rc1-c5{50} Rf8-e8{98}
30. Ra1-c1{178} Re8-d8{84}
31. d5-d6{276} b7-b6{0}
32. Rc5-c8{6} Kg8-h7{500}
33. Kd4-d5{28} Rd8-c8{120}
34. Rc1-c8{14} a6-a5{104}
35. e5-e6{52} Rd7-a7{118}
36. e6-e7{22} Ra7-e7{112}
37. d6-e7{10} b6-b5{90}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
turingengine: (White)
normal: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?...092&game=Chess

Was there any way to stop TuringEngine get the Queen?

In this game till end game I could not find any tactical mistake. Only
When TuringEngine got its Queen GetClub came into trouble.

Bye
Sanny

Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html

GetClub Normal Level played good moves but still lost the game.

Sanny — Mon, 12 May 2008 10:58:35 GMT

GetClub Normal Level played good moves but still lost the game.

Sanny — Mon, 12 May 2008 10:58:35 GMT

GetClub Normal Level played good moves but still lost the game.

Sanny — Mon, 12 May 2008 10:58:35 GMT

Bravo To Danny Angermeier

Brian Lafferty — Mon, 12 May 2008 01:22:52 GMT

Takes first place at K-3 National via tie breaks. Nice kid. One of our
own from Massachusetts.

Web-based FEN notation editors for chess.

Rich Hutnik[_2_] — Sun, 11 May 2008 21:08:11 GMT

I found these two sites:
http://www.lutanho.net/pgn/board2fen.html
http://www.bytewings.nl/fen/

Off this thread on the SchemingMind site:
http://www.schemingmind.com/topic.aspx?topic_id=75068

They look of value to me. The second one allows ? spaces.

- Rich

MTel Masters 2008

Kidon — Sun, 11 May 2008 21:00:29 GMT

A lot of pics from Round 4 - free for web sites, blogs and personal
usage are available at http://en.chessfish.com/modules/news...hp?storyid=634
and http://en.chessfish.com/modules/news...hp?storyid=635

Re: John McCain is the New Manchurian Candidate

parrthenon@cs.com — Sun, 11 May 2008 18:02:06 GMT

THE CASTING COUCH

Jordan, the beautiful
and fetching daughter of Senator Thomas Jordan.> -- Sam Sloan

Dear Sam,

The obvious choice for this role is your tenth-cousin Ann Coulter.

Sam Sloan wrote:
> John McCain is the New Manchurian Candidate
>
> My tenth-cousin, Republican Ann Coulter, committed a great political
> blunder when she asked "Is Obama a Manchurian candidate".
>
> This was a real boo-boo because the obvious Manchurian candidate in
> this election is John McCain.
>
> The book and two movies entitled "The Manchurian Candidate" are about
> an American military officer in the Korean War who is capturer by the
> North Koreans and turned over to Chinese doctors who brainwash him. He
> is then returned to the American lines with a false implanted story in
> his memory which makes him a war hero. He then becomes a candidate for
> President of the United States.
>
> Whom does this resemble? Obviously, John McCain, who was a prisoner of
> the North Vietnamese for five years, who attempted to brainwash him
> before turning him over to the Americans and who has become a
> candidate for President of the United States.
>
> Now that that is settled, the next step which I have undertaken is to
> do the third movie version of The Manchurian Candidate.
>
> Fortunately, with the wonders of modern computer graphics, it is no
> longer necessary to hire live actors. I will just fill the roles with
> the actors we already have.
>
> I am now holding a casting couch. (I always wanted to do this.)
> Beautiful girls are invited to audition for the applicable roles.
>
> The first two roles are obvious:
>
> John McCain will play Sergeant Raymond Shaw
>
> Hillary Clinton will plan Eleanor Shaw. (The actress who played
> Eleanor in the second movie version has stated that she studied and
> imitated the real Hillary Clinton in playing this role.)
>
> Now, I have only to fill the other major roles.
>
> Barak Obama seems right for Major Ben Marco
>
> John Kerry will do for Senator Thomas Jordan
>
> The other major roles that will need to be filled are:
>
> Jocelyn Jordan, the beautiful and fetching daughter of Senator Thomas
> Jordan.
>
> The evil doctor who is Chinese, Dr. Yen Lo, in the original version
> and Russian, Noyle, in the remake.
>
> Chinjin, the double agent who betrays them is Korean in the original
> but British in the remake.
>
> Al Melvin, the other veteran who has similar dreams which confirm the
> suspicions of Major Marco.
>
> The Janet Leigh character does not exist in the remake. It has been
> suggested that she is a Communist double agent, especially since she
> makes it extremely easy for Major Ben Marco to seduce her. She
> actually approaches and seduces him.
>
> Any suggestions for these or any other roles would be appreciated.
> Fame and glory await you!
>
> Sam Sloan

Re: John McCain is the New Manchurian Candidate

parrthenon@cs.com — Sun, 11 May 2008 18:02:06 GMT