What have HIARCS 11.2 SP make wrong in this game?

Designed for posting all types of tournaments and Games (e.g. Man vs. Machine, Computer vs. Computer and basement matches.)

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
User avatar
Thomas Wallendik
Member
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:31 pm
Location: 80687 München

What have HIARCS 11.2 SP make wrong in this game?

Post by Thomas Wallendik »

Hi,

here i post a game, whitch loses from Hiarcs. But what have HIARCS 11.2 SP make wrong?

The Game was played with 512 Megabyte Hashtables and the time-Control 40/180 Minutes. All 3-4-5-Man-Tablebases. Own book.

Here is the Game:

[Event "1. Schachturnier"]
[Site "München"]
[Date "2007.10.04"]
[Round "1.1"]
[White "HIARCS 11.2 SP"]
[Black "Colossus 2007d"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A67"]
[Annotator "1.03;1.04"]
[PlyCount "166"]
[EventDate "2007.10.02"]
[EventType "tourn"]
[Source "Wallendik"]
[TimeControl "40/10800:40/10800:40/10800"]

{Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.53GHz 2527 MHz W=17.2 ply; 317kN/s; 1.656.062
TBAs B=16.8 ply; 730kN/s; 5.977.616 TBAs; TW-Bigbook.ctg} 1. d4 {0.01/1 0} e6
{B/0 0} 2. c4 {0.01/1 0} c5 {B/0 0} 3. d5 {0.01/1 0} exd5 {B/0 0} 4. cxd5 {
0.01/1 0} d6 {B/0 0} 5. Nc3 {0.01/1 0} Nf6 {B/0 0} 6. e4 {0.01/1 0} g6 {B/0 0}
7. f4 {0.01/1 0} Bg7 {B/0 0} 8. Bb5+ {0.01/1 0} Nbd7 {B/0 0} 9. e5 {0.01/1 0}
dxe5 {B/0 0} 10. fxe5 {0.01/1 0} Nh5 {B/0 0} 11. e6 {0.01/1 0} Qh4+ {B/0 0} 12.
Kd2 {0.01/1 0} fxe6 {B/0 0} 13. dxe6 {0.01/1 0} O-O {B/0 0} 14. exd7 {0.01/1 0}
Bxd7 {B/0 0} 15. Bxd7 {0.01/1 0} Rf2+ {B/0 0} 16. Nge2 {1.03/14 790} Rd8 {B/0 0
} 17. Qb3+ {0.86/14 451} c4 {B/0 0} 18. Qb5 {1.61/14 412} Kh8 {B/0 0} 19. Rd1 {
1.07/14 394} Nf4 {B/0 0} 20. g3 {0.69/14 450} Bxc3+ {B/0 0} 21. Kxc3 {
0.76/15 813} Nxe2+ {B/0 0} 22. Kb4 {0.78/15 229} Qf6 {B/0 0} 23. Ka4 {
0.95/15 1566} Nd4 {(c3) 1.04/14 409} 24. Bg5 {1.00/16 234} Qg7 {1.07/17 550}
25. Bh6 {1.00/16 318} Qf6 {0.89/16 625} 26. Qxb7 {0.93/15 323} Rxb2 {
0.84/15 615} 27. Qxb2 {0.24/17 1274} Qa6+ {0.81/15 616} 28. Kb4 {0.31/11 3}
Rb8+ {0.62/16 656} 29. Kc3 {0.00/16 209} Qa5+ {0.65/16 641} 30. Kxd4 {
0.00/16 282} Rxb2 {0.52/16 626} 31. Bf4 {0.00/14 284} Kg7 {(Qb6+) 0.43/14 437}
32. Rac1 {(a4) 1.17/12 196} g5 {(Qxa2) 0.40/14 283} 33. Be5+ {1.08/14 299} Kf7
{0.00/15 274} 34. Rc3 {(Rxc4) 0.00/15 1063} Qb6+ {0.00/15 546} 35. Kxc4 {
0.00/15 187} Qa6+ {0.00/15 445} 36. Kd4 {(Kd5) -0.76/15 477} Re2 {0.00/15 620}
37. Bc7 {-0.78/13 126} Re7 {-0.53/16 505} 38. Bg4 {(Bc6) -0.89/15 195} Qb7 {
-0.74/15 756} 39. Bh5+ {-1.00/13 104} Kg8 {-0.75/16 461} 40. Bf3 {
(Be5) -1.04/14 111} Qb4+ {-0.80/16 461} 41. Rc4 {(Kd3) -1.10/16 286} Qb2+ {
-0.80/16 320} 42. Kd3 {-1.12/17 327} Qa3+ {-0.83/16 373} 43. Rc3 {-1.13/17 242}
Re3+ {-0.82/16 320} 44. Kxe3 {-1.13/17 77} Qxc3+ {-0.81/16 176} 45. Kf2 {
(Ke2) -1.17/17 345} Qc2+ {(Qxc7) -0.87/16 371} 46. Kf1 {(Ke3) -1.17/17 291}
Qxc7 {-0.84/16 295} 47. Rd2 {-1.17/17 287} Qc1+ {-0.85/16 227} 48. Ke2 {
-1.22/17 232} h6 {(Kg7) -0.86/16 423} 49. Bd5+ {(Be4) -1.17/16 271} Kg7 {
-0.90/17 351} 50. Kd3 {(Bb3) -1.19/16 262} Qb1+ {(Kf6) -0.93/16 238} 51. Kd4 {
(Ke3) -1.19/18 254} Qb6+ {(Qb4+) -0.93/17 387} 52. Kd3 {-1.19/19 255} Kf6 {
(Qd6) -0.93/17 345} 53. Bc4 {(Re2) -1.19/18 255} g4 {(Qd6+) -0.96/16 281} 54.
Re2 {-1.19/19 256} Qd8+ {(Qd6+) -0.96/16 221} 55. Ke4 {(Kc3) -1.19/19 257} Kg5
{(Qd7) -0.97/17 421} 56. Ke5 {(Bd5) -1.20/18 257} Qd7 {(a5) -0.95/17 316} 57.
Ke4 {-1.20/17 188} Qc6+ {(Qd6) -0.96/17 188} 58. Kd4 {-1.19/20 262} Qd6+ {
-0.95/17 347} 59. Kc3 {(Bd5) -1.20/19 263} Qf6+ {(h5) -0.95/17 239} 60. Kd3 {
-1.19/19 263} h5 {(a5) -0.95/18 380} 61. Rd2 {(Bd5) -1.20/18 264} Qd6+ {
(Qe5) -0.95/16 171} 62. Kc3 {-1.20/18 265} Qb8 {(Qe5+) -0.95/17 257} 63. Re2 {
(Kd3) -1.20/17 207} a5 {(Qc7) -0.96/17 286} 64. Kd4 {(Kd3) -1.20/17 219} Qd6+ {
-0.97/17 301} 65. Ke4 {(Kc3) -1.20/15 177} a4 {(h4) -0.94/17 233} 66. Bd3 {
-1.18/17 217} Kf6 {-0.95/18 396} 67. Bc4 {(Rf2+) -1.18/19 288} Qd1 {
(Qc5) -1.02/17 211} 68. Ba6 {(Bd3) -1.35/18 340} Ke6 {-1.03/17 150} 69. Ke3 {
-1.35/18 287} Qd5 {(Ke5) -1.06/17 436} 70. Bd3 {-1.35/17 200} Ke5 {-1.07/17 202
} 71. Rc2 {(Rf2) -2.60/19 1505} Qd4+ {(Qf3+) -1.90/17 183} 72. Kd2 {
-2.60/18 176} Qg1 {(Ke6) -2.05/17 319} 73. Kc3 {-2.98/19 706} Qa1+ {
-2.50/17 207} 74. Kb4 {(Kd2) -3.02/18 103} Kd4 {-2.71/18 312} 75. Bg6 {
-3.82/19 338} Qe1+ {-2.74/17 130} 76. Kxa4 {-3.82/19 72} Qe6 {-3.38/17 149} 77.
Bxh5 {-4.10/17 82} Qf5 {-3.36/16 149} 78. Kb3 {-4.35/18 108} Qb5+ {-3.84/17 229
} 79. Ka3 {-4.60/14 0} Qxh5 {-3.85/18 185} 80. Kb2 {-5.15/17 116} Qa5 {
-13.13/20 537} 81. Ka1 {-#27/21 1538} Kd3 {(Qe1+) -#27/16 542} 82. Rb2 {
-6.67/18 673} Qc3 {(Qe1+) -#26/7 0} 83. a4 {-#28/14 34} Qa3+ {-#25/7 0} 0-1



In all the other Games Hiarcs scored very well on my computer. But i am the greatest Hiarcs-Fan in Germany and i waiting for HIARCS 12. But all HIARCS-Versions are the best near Fritz to analysed-Games and of course in playing versus another Engine. Of Course, Rybka is the strongest program in the world at the moment, but i think, that HIARCS and Fritz 10 are in a couple of positions are better in analysing then Rybka.

Best


Thomas Wallendik
TW
User avatar
Mark Uniacke
Hiarcs Author
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 1:32 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Mark Uniacke »

Thanks for the game, I will look at it when I get time.

I also use Hiarcs to analyse and I think with the learning features it is the best analyst.
Best wishes,
Mark

https://www.hiarcs.com
Post Reply