Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 26th 10, 07:50 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,170
Default Chess book errors pre-computer are legion - ever notice this?-Modern Chess Strategy by Pachman

Here is an alternative viewpoint.

I have a small database of games by Bent Larsen. There is a text intro
and this is it:

"Bent Larsen

"50 udvalgte partier 1948-68"

"50 selected games 1948-68"

The games is from Bent Larsen's book in Danish: "50 udvalgte partier
1948-68",

(ISBN 87-568-0583-7).

The games is annofritzed [yeccch]: analysed on a computer with the
chessprogram Fritz 5.00 (the 16 bit program). The settings for the
analysis is: threshold 0.50 pawns, calc. time is 5 seconds for one
move, the openingbook is Power Book and the processor in the computer
is AMD K-2 350 MHz.

Comparing Fritz 5.00 and Bent Larsen

Not the same evaluation

In Enevoldsen,H - Larsen,B 0-1 20...c4 Fritz give the move ?? and Bent
Larsen !! - 21...c3 Fritz give ?? and BL !......"

So here is that Enevoldsen,H - Larsen game, with Fritz's annotations:

"[Event "KSU tt KS-FS"]
[Site "Copenhagen"]
[Date "1953.??.??"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Enevoldsen, Harald"]
[Black "Larsen, Bent"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D70"]
[Annotator "Fritz 5.00 (5s)"]
[PlyCount "52"]
[EventDate "1953.??.??"]
[EventType "game"]
[EventCountry "DEN"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. f3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nb6 6. Nc3 Bg7 7. Be3 O-
O 8. Qd2
Nc6 {d4 becomes the focus of attention} 9. O-O-O e5 10. d5 Nd4 11. f4
c5 12.
fxe5 Bg4 13. Re1 Bxe5 14. Bg5 {out of book} f6 15. Bf4 Qd6 16. Bxe5
fxe5 ({
Weaker is} 16... Qxe5 17. h3 Bd7 18. Nf3 $14) 17. h3 Bd7 18. Be2 Rf2
19. Qg5
Na4 20. Nd1 c4 $4 $18 {Black lets it slip away} (20... Rf4 $142 {
was much better} 21. Bd3 Nb6 $11) 21. Qg3 $11 (21. Nxf2 Qb4 22. Nd1
Qxe1 23.
Qd2 (23. Bxc4 $2 {is nothing because of} Rc8 24. b3 Nc3 25. d6+ Be6
$19) 23...
Qxd2+ 24. Kxd2 $11) 21... c3 $4 $18 {releasing the pressure on the
opponent} (
21... Rf4 22. Qe3 Rc8 $17) 22. bxc3 $4 $19 {overlooking an easy win}
(22. Nxf2
Qb4 $1 {takes home the point} 23. Qxc3 Nxc3 24. a3 Na2+ 25. Kb1 Qxe1+
26. Kxa2
Qxf2 27. Nf3 Qxe2 28. Nxe5 Qxg2 29. Rd1 Qxe4 30. Nxd7 Qxd5+ 31. Kb1
Qxd7 32. h4
$19) (22. Qxf2 cxb2+ 23. Nxb2 Rc8+ 24. Bc4 Qa3) 22... Qa3+ 23. Kd2 Rf4
24. Bc4
Rc8 25. Qd3 (25. Ne2 Rxc4 26. Nxf4 (26. cxd4 $4 {is a horrible
blunder} Qxa2+
27. Ke3 Qb3+ 28. Ndc3 Rxc3+ 29. Nxc3 Qxc3+ 30. Ke2 Bb5+ 31. Kd1 Nb2#)
26...
exf4 27. Qxf4 Rxc3 28. Qb8+ (28. Nxc3 $4 Qxc3+ 29. Kd1 Nb2#) 28... Bc8
29.
Qxc8+ Rxc8 30. Re3 Qb4+ 31. Nc3 Nxc3 32. Re2 Ncxe2+ 33. Ke3 Qc3+ 34.
Kf2 Rf8#)
25... Nb2 26. Nxb2 (26. Bb3 Nxd3 27. Kxd3 Bb5+ 28. Kd2 Nxb3+ 29. axb3
Rf2+ 30.
Re2 Qa2+ 31. Kc1 Bxe2 32. Nb2 Rf1+ 33. Kc2 Qb1+ 34. Kd2 Qxb2+ 35. Ke3
Rxc3#)
26... Qxb2+ (26... Qxb2+ 27. Kd1 Rxc4 28. Re3 Ba4+ 29. Qc2 Qxc2+ 30.
Ke1 Qd1#)
0-1"

If you play it over with a good engine, you'll see that Fritz was
WRONG! I know that was a long time ago - but look again at what the
person who wrote the text introduction said; NOTHING - he assumed
Fritz was right and Larsen was wrong.

I know that there are many times Karpov and Capablanca will say
something like ".... Re8 would be a mistake." Then, almost
apologetically is anyone still reading? they give a sample line.
Sometimes this sample line is full of errors - but a check will show
that ...Re8 is definitely a mistake. The great players can see a move
is bad without necessarily backing it up with a page of correct
analysis.

Goodbye.

$5, Odessa Steps etc etc.

  #2   Report Post  
Old May 26th 10, 08:44 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,536
Default Chess book errors pre-computer are legion - ever notice this?-Modern Chess Strategy by Pachman

On May 26, 9:50*pm, Offramp wrote:
Here is an alternative viewpoint.

I have a small database of games by Bent Larsen. There is a text intro
and this is it:



If you play it over with a good engine, you'll see that Fritz was
WRONG! I know that was a long time ago - but look again at what the
person who wrote the text introduction said; NOTHING - he assumed
Fritz was right and Larsen was wrong.


Well I could not play your game in Chessbase version 9...it was not in
standard PGN so you got all sorts of legal but bizarre moves.


I know that there are many times Karpov and Capablanca will say
something like ".... Re8 would be a mistake." Then, almost
apologetically is anyone still reading? they give a sample line.
Sometimes this sample line is full of errors - but a check will show
that ...Re8 is definitely a mistake. The great players can see a move
is bad without necessarily backing it up with a page of correct
analysis.


Right. But Fritz is hardly ever wrong if you give him enough time.

RL
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New member Earl rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 6 October 17th 06 01:55 PM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 April 23rd 06 05:21 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 April 7th 06 05:30 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 February 19th 06 05:44 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 October 19th 05 05:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017