2018 Spacious-Mind Swiss Chess Computer League - Division 2

This forum is for general discussions and questions, including Collectors Corner and anything to do with Computer chess.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Chessmaster Ireland wrote:Nick

This is such a great tournament and with one of my all time favourites programs the Psion Chess doing quite well, I decided to change one of my Android ChessGenius piece sets to the old Psion Chess set. Funny thing is, I keep thinking that I am actually playing Psion and not ChessGenius!!

Bryan
Hi Bryan,

Well it doesn't surprise me that you know how to change the pieces on ChessGenius :)

They definitively are Psion pieces :)

Best regards
Nick
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

TracySMiller wrote:Wow, that Sargon III move 24. Nxf5! That was beautiful. I wouldn't have found that move if you gave me a weekend to study that position.

You're right, that program is fun to watch play. The King's Gambit against a strong computer program...and won!
Yes as tournament organizer and operator I am supposed to be unbiased, but when you play Sargon 3 it becomes harder and harder because of its amazing style of play, very tactical and surprisingly strong in endgames. Add to it this weird book that it has, which has a tendency to play all these risky openings and you get more hooked by it the more you play it.

You have to consider that Sargon 3 came out in 1984 as a 32KB program on an Apple II. In 1988 it was ported to Amiga and played on an Amiga 500 with 7.6 MHz speed. As a result since it was so slow it was rated around 1650 ELO.

Nowadays on an Amiga Emulator playing on my I7 laptop it has improved by about 800+ ELO and plays at a comparable speed of a Pentium 90/100 and reaches 9 ply in 30 seconds per move average setting.

So it has gone from about 4 ply to 9 ply and increased by 800+ ELO!

Now that has to be amazing!

I am almost tempted to buy a faster computer than my I7 just to see what more it could do with further search depth improvements? Add another 5 ply and reach 14 ply, would it now play at 3000 ELO?

It would not surprise me that if things were equal and Sargon III were to truly play at I7 speed (not through an emulator) that it would kick the asses of Stockfish, Komodo etc etc. It might even beat Alpha Zero easily! LOL...

Why? because as you have seen from this one move, Sargon III finds and plays moves like 24. Nxf5 without hesitation and these modern programs would miss them having previously discounted them early on in their search tree.

ps.. compare 32K to SF8 which is 972K = 30 times smaller programming! Heck even Rebel 6 is 393 KB. Even Chess System Tal the program that just got whupped has 985KB

Chess programming geniuses is what the Spracklen's were.

Best regards
Nick
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Post by Fernando »

spacious_mind wrote:
TracySMiller wrote:Wow, that Sargon III move 24. Nxf5! That was beautiful. I wouldn't have found that move if you gave me a weekend to study that position.

You're right, that program is fun to watch play. The King's Gambit against a strong computer program...and won!
Yes as tournament organizer and operator I am supposed to be unbiased, but when you play Sargon 3 it becomes harder and harder because of its amazing style of play, very tactical and surprisingly strong in endgames. Add to it this weird book that it has, which has a tendency to play all these risky openings and you get more hooked by it the more you play it.

You have to consider that Sargon 3 came out in 1984 as a 32KB program on an Apple II. In 1988 it was ported to Amiga and played on an Amiga 500 with 7.6 MHz speed. As a result since it was so slow it was rated around 1650 ELO.

Nowadays on an Amiga Emulator playing on my I7 laptop it has improved by about 800+ ELO and plays at a comparable speed of a Pentium 90/100 and reaches 9 ply in 30 seconds per move average setting.

So it has gone from about 4 ply to 9 ply and increased by 800+ ELO!

Now that has to be amazing!

I am almost tempted to buy a faster computer than my I7 just to see what more it could do with further search depth improvements? Add another 5 ply and reach 14 ply, would it now play at 3000 ELO?

It would not surprise me that if things were equal and Sargon III were to truly play at I7 speed (not through an emulator) that it would kick the asses of Stockfish, Komodo etc etc. It might even beat Alpha Zero easily! LOL...

Why? because as you have seen from this one move, Sargon III finds and plays moves like 24. Nxf5 without hesitation and these modern programs would miss them having previously discounted them early on in their search tree.

ps.. compare 32K to SF8 which is 972K = 30 times smaller programming! Heck even Rebel 6 is 393 KB. Even Chess System Tal the program that just got whupped has 985KB

Chess programming geniuses is what the Spracklen's were.

Best regards

And what about sargon V? It should be stronger than sargon 3 in any platform, so if running in a very very fast comp it should be even more amazing than sargon 3, exception made that perhaps sargon V was a failure...mmm...not possible...
Festina Lente
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Fernando wrote:
And what about sargon V? It should be stronger than sargon 3 in any platform, so if running in a very very fast comp it should be even more amazing than sargon 3, exception made that perhaps sargon V was a failure...mmm...not possible...
Sargon 5 played in Division 3 and finished 9th way behind Sargon 3. Sargon IV is playing in Division 2 together with Sargon 3.

http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php? ... &start=105

Amiga and Atari Sargon 3 are the strongest programs written for Motorola chip. The PC Sargons are not as strong.

Sargon 5 might be the strongest PC Sargon but that is only because Sargon IV was terrible on PC and the PC Sargon 3 was also a poor conversion.

Besides Sargon 5 is no where near as exciting in style as what Sargon 3 is :)

Regards
Nick
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Post by Fernando »

spacious_mind wrote:
Fernando wrote:
And what about sargon V? It should be stronger than sargon 3 in any platform, so if running in a very very fast comp it should be even more amazing than sargon 3, exception made that perhaps sargon V was a failure...mmm...not possible...
Sargon 5 played in Division 3 and finished 9th way behind Sargon 3. Sargon IV is playing in Division 2 together with Sargon 3.

http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php? ... &start=105

Amiga and Atari Sargon 3 are the strongest programs written for Motorola chip. The PC Sargons are not as strong.

Sargon 5 might be the strongest PC Sargon but that is only because Sargon IV was terrible on PC and the PC Sargon 3 was also a poor conversion.

Besides Sargon 5 is no where near as exciting in style as what Sargon 3 is :)

Regards
Yeah, well, another reason to deplore the fact i was incapable of making work the emul for amiga
Festina Lente
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Round 6 Game 3:

DB Socrates 3.0 - DB Chess Genius 1

RESULT: 0-1

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/bvMhcAJV


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]2r1k3/p2R1pp1/1p5p/q2BNrn1/3P4/4P2P/PQ3PP1/6K1 w - - 0 31[/fen]


DB Socrates 3.0 is up by a pawn and is putting a lot of pressure on DB Chess Genius 1 when in this position Socrates understimates the counterthreat dangers resulting from the move 31. Bb7? DB Socrates 3.0 would have had continuing advantage had the move 31. Rd6 been played.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]8/8/1p5p/8/3P1P2/Q3P2K/1r3q2/3k4 w - - 0 64[/fen]


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Socrates 3.0, 30S. (2300)
3 Inaccuracies
7 Mistakes
1 Blunders
42 Average centipawn loss

DB Chess Genius 1, 30S. (2200)
3 Inaccuracies
4 Mistakes
0 Blunders
28 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 4:

W3X Chessmaster 4000 - DB M-Chess 1.71

RESULT: 1/2-1/2

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/q3fGXp0v


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]3r1kr1/4bp1Q/p4p2/5B2/4P3/1R1pqpB1/P6P/1KR5 w - - 0 36[/fen]

W3X Chessmaster 4000 has clear winning advantage when it blunders with the move 36. Qh5? Game winning was the move 36. e5! The game ends in a draw.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]R7/4kp2/P4p2/5B2/4P3/1K2b3/8/2r5 w - - 0 70[/fen]


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

W3X Chessmaster 4000, 60/30. (2300)
1 Inaccuracies
4 Mistakes
1 Blunders
27 Average centipawn loss

DB M-Chess 1.71, 30S. (2250)
4 Inaccuracies
7 Mistakes
0 Blunders
28 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 5:

DB WChess 1.05 - DB Zarkov 2.61

RESULT: 1-0

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/xdruNykA


FINAL POSITION

[fen]8/5k2/1R5p/3P2p1/8/8/7P/4K3 w - - 0 65[/fen]

DB WChess 1.05 was directing this game from start to finish. DB Zarkov 2.61 played too many inaccuracies and mistakes making this a comfortable win for DB WChess 1.05.


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB WChess 1.05, 30S. (2400)
5 Inaccuracies
1 Mistakes
0 Blunders
20 Average centipawn loss

DB Zarkov 2.61, 60/30. (2250)
14 Inaccuracies
5 Mistakes
0 Blunders
37 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 6:

DB Kasparov Gambit - MAC Sigma Chess 4.02

RESULT: 0-1

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/i6qmaTo0


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]r5k1/P2r1p1p/3b1qp1/P3n3/Q2Np3/4B1PP/5P2/2R1R1K1 w - - 0 40[/fen]

It seemed that DB Kasparov Gambit would win this game, but then blunders in this position with the move 40. Bh6? which then turns the game for MAC Sigma Chess 4.02 to win. Which MAC Sigma Chess 4.02 does, pretty easily.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]8/5k1p/8/P5p1/4p1P1/6KP/5P2/6rr w - - 0 57[/fen]


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Kasparov Gambit, 30S. (2250)
4 Inaccuracies
7 Mistakes
1 Blunders
50 Average centipawn loss

MAC Sigma Chess 4.02, 30S. (2300)
3 Inaccuracies
5 Mistakes
0 Blunders
32 Average centipawn loss


Best regards
Nick
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Round 6 Game 7:

DB Hiarcs 1.0 - MAC Sargon 4

RESULT: 1-0

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/rP3ZYBol


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]r3k1r1/p1pq1p1p/1p2p3/n5pB/1Q1Pb3/P3PP2/PB1R2PP/R5K1 w q - 0 20[/fen]


DB Hiarcs 1.0 positionally is slightly better after 20 moves. In this position on move 20 MAC Sargon 4 best move was 20. ... Bg6 with everything still to play for. 20 MAC Sargon 4 made a mistake playing 20. ... Bd5? which makes everything much easier for DB Hiarcs 1.0.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]8/1k6/1pr5/8/5P1Q/P7/6PP/5K2 w - - 0 51[/fen]


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Hiarcs 1.0, 30S. (2300)
4 Inaccuracies
2 Mistakes
0 Blunders
29 Average centipawn loss

MAC Sargon 4, 30S. (2200)
5 Inaccuracies
9 Mistakes
1 Blunders
50 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 8:

DB Psion Chess 2.13 - MAC MacChess 2.5

RESULT: 1/2-1/2

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/gG40qxRQ


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]r5k1/2p1bppp/1q6/4P3/2Bn1B2/2NQ1b1P/5P2/4R1K1 w - - 0 28[/fen]

MAC MacChess 2.5 had the best opportunities in this drawn game. In the above position MAC MacChess 2.5 has pretty good advantage but missed the move 28. ... Rd8! that probably would have won quite easily. 28. ... Ra3 only draws.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]7k/8/3bN2p/3B2p1/8/7P/4bPK1/8 w - - 0 41[/fen]


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Psion Chess 2.13, 30S. (2200)
4 Inaccuracies
4 Mistakes
0 Blunders
27 Average centipawn loss

MAC MacChess 2.5, 30S. (2300)
3 Inaccuracies
3 Mistakes
0 Blunders
26 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 9:

DB Fritz 1 - MAC Gnu Chess 4.0

RESULT: 1/2-1/2

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/YhZ2gTwC


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]8/8/8/R4K2/1p6/1k6/8/8 w - - 0 51[/fen]

The frustration of Morsch which people witnessed over the years thousands of times by playing Fritz 1, 2 & 3 DOS and the many derivatives of these programs inside about 100 (or what seems to be a 100) dedicated chess computers is nicely highlighted in the above position.

DB Fritz 1 easily led this game from the start and it seemed that it was just a matter of time for me to notch a win on the scorecard. But no, as so often happens in an endgame, Morsch messes up and in this example lets a win slip away.

This should be simple endgame knowledge which every chess player learns from his own hard earned losing experience when learning chess as a beginner. You cannot allow the King to get to the 2nd rank to support it's pawn in a rook ending, while your own King is out of position to assist your Rook. It is just a matter of simple math, the art of counting squares.

Anyway DB Fritz 1 messes up by playing a rook move first with with 51. Ra7 instead of a King move with 51. Ke4!

Perhaps I should not be too harsh as I suspect that many old non Morsch dedicated chess computers would likely make the exact same mistake. Difference however being that DB Fritz 1 played at a speed of a Pentium 90 which makes it worse.

This actually is a good position to test your dedicated chess computer with.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]8/2R5/8/5K2/8/8/1p6/3k4 w - - 0 59[/fen]


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Fritz 1, 30S. (2200)
6 Inaccuracies
1 Mistakes
1 Blunders
40 Average centipawn loss

MAC Gnu Chess 4.0, 30S. (2150)
8 Inaccuracies
6 Mistakes
2 Blunders
41 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 10:

DB Kallisto 1.83 - DB Fritz 2

RESULT: 1-0

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/R5ub3V57


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]6r1/4kn2/1p2p2p/2n1Pp1N/5P1P/8/P2BB1b1/1R2K3 w - - 0 43[/fen]

DB Kallisto 1.83 is ahead but with so many pieces still on the board it is not so easy to win. DB Fritz 2 however blunders in this position with the move 43. ... Bh3? and as a result does indeed make it easy for DB Kallisto 1.83 to win. 43. ... Rb8 was probably the best move to play.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]5R2/8/3kP2p/8/P7/8/8/2K5 w - - 0 69[/fen]


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Kallisto 1.83, 60/30. (2332)
2 Inaccuracies
1 Mistakes
0 Blunders
15 Average centipawn loss

DB Fritz 2, 30S. (2250)
5 Inaccuracies
3 Mistakes
2 Blunders
30 Average centipawn loss


Best regards
Nick
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Round 6 Game 11:

DB Chess Genius 2 - Millennium Chess Genius Pro

RESULT: 1-0

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/PYB80APO


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]8/2rrppk1/1p4pp/1R1nP3/R1pPNPPP/2P3K1/8/8 w - - 0 49[/fen]


The game is positionally a draw when Millennium Chess Genius Pro starts messing up. 49. ... f5 or even 49. ... f6 are good moves in this position. Millennium Chess Genius Pro picked the wrong pawn to advance with 49. ... e6?


FINAL POSITION

[fen]5R2/4Ppk1/3P2p1/6P1/7P/5K2/4r3/8 w - - 0 76[/fen]

Millennium Chess Genius Pro was outplayed in the endgame by DB Chess Genius 2.


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Chess Genius 2, 30S. (2300)
3 Inaccuracies
0 Mistakes
0 Blunders
23 Average centipawn loss

Millennium Chess Genius Pro, 30S. (2307)
9 Inaccuracies
5 Mistakes
2 Blunders
36 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 12:

DB Gandalf 2.1 - W3X Arasan 2.0

RESULT: 1-0

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/T4ZJSp6w


FINAL POSITION

[fen]1R6/5P1k/8/3K3p/2p5/6P1/1P6/3r4 w - - 0 60[/fen]

This game was messy with plenty of mistakes by both programs. DB Gandalf 2.1 however was better throughout.


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Gandalf 2.1, 30S. (2250)
8 Inaccuracies
5 Mistakes
0 Blunders
43 Average centipawn loss

W3X Arasan 2.0, 60/30. (2300)
12 Inaccuracies
9 Mistakes
2 Blunders
63 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 13:

Mephisto Atlanta - DB Nimzo Guernica

RESULT: 1-0

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/Mft7a4MF


CRITICAL POSITION 1

[fen]8/8/5k2/3K1b1P/8/8/1R6/8 w - - 0 70[/fen]

There were quite a few mistakes in this game by both programs, but Mephisto Atlanta seemed to be ahead throughout as one mistake was negated by the other. This position is won. it just requires Mephisto Atlanta to play 70. Rf2! forcing the loss of Bishop for the pawn and Mephisto wins with the Rook. But Mephisto Atlanta makes another Fritz/Morsch mistake and plays 70. h6? gifting a draw to DB Nimzo Guernica.

CRITICAL POSITION 2

[fen]8/8/1R4kP/4K3/8/3b4/8/8 w - - 0 72[/fen]

But fortunately for Mephsito Atlanta, there are other programs who have just as much difficulty in endgames. In this position the choice is very simple. Play 72. ... Kh7! and you draw. Play 72. ... Kg5? and you lose.

Well you might guess which move DB Nimzo Guernica played!


FINAL POSITION

[fen]8/7R/5K2/8/6k1/8/8/8 w - - 0 78[/fen]

So Mephsito Atlanta gets a much needed win to avoid a bottom spot in the table.


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

Mephisto Atlanta, 30S. (2270)
4 Inaccuracies
2 Mistakes
1 Blunders
32 Average centipawn loss

DB Nimzo Guernica, 60/30. (2200)
5 Inaccuracies
7 Mistakes
2 Blunders
45 Average centipawn loss


Round 6 Game 14:

W3X Gnu Chess 3.21 - MAC RD Chess 2.2.2

RESULT: 1/2-1/2

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/mQORERQH


FINAL POSITION

[fen]8/8/8/8/pk6/8/8/1K6 w - - 0 84[/fen]

This was a game between two pretty weak programs with loads of errors. W3X Gnu Chess 3.21 had massive advantages in the middle game and MAC RD Chess 2.2.2 had massive advantages in the endgame. The draw in the end was fair since both are pretty bad.


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

W3X Gnu Chess 3.21, 60/30. (2150)
12 Inaccuracies
3 Mistakes
3 Blunders
40 Average centipawn loss

MAC RD Chess 2.2.2, 30S. (2100)
3 Inaccuracies
9 Mistakes
2 Blunders
41 Average centipawn loss


Best regards
Nick
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Round 6 Game 15:

W3X K-Chess 2.0 - W3X LChess 3.0

RESULT: 0-1

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/0X2RB6vW


FINAL POSITION

[fen]6r1/5k2/5P2/4K3/8/8/8/7q w - - 0 71[/fen]

The last game in Round 6 was also a game between two bad programs. It also repeated a pattern of an earlier game played in this Round. W3X K-Chess 2.0 had big advantages in the middle game and W3X LChess 3.0 big advantages in the endgame. This time though W3X LChess 3.0 keeps its endgame advantages and wins.


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

W3X K-Chess 2.0, 30S. (2150)
11 Inaccuracies
7 Mistakes
2 Blunders
47 Average centipawn loss

W3X LChess 3.0, 30S. (2100)
4 Inaccuracies
5 Mistakes
0 Blunders
32 Average centipawn loss


ROUND 6 RESULTS

Image


TABLE AFTER ROUND 6

Image

Rebel 6 and Sargon 3 are the only undefeated programs after 6 Rounds.


Best regards
Nick
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

DIVISION 2 FINAL RANKINGS PREDICTOR AFTER 6 ROUNDS

Image

The average performance dropped to ELO 2070.

Rebel 6 and Sargon 3 are also neck and neck on the strength indicator.


Best regards
Nick
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Here is how it looks in the Predictors competition after 6 Rounds:

Image

Tracy wins narrowly another Round and is ahead 4 rounds to 2.

But if Genius 2 were to stop underperforming and if MCGP were to win a few more then there still might be a turnaround before the end of the tournament.

Best regards
Nick
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

DIVISION 2 ROUND 7 SCHEDULE

Image


Best regards
Nick
TracySMiller
Full Member
Posts: 865
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:24 am
Location: Kingsport, TN

Post by TracySMiller »

It's going to go down to the wire between Rebel 6 and Sargon III, I think. I'm surprised how well MAC Sigma Chess is playing.
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Round 7 Game 1:

DB Rebel 6 Active - W3X Chessmaster 4000

RESULT: 1-0

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/LgfAAOrd


CRITICAL POSITION 1

[fen]8/3k1p2/1p1P1p2/p1p1pP2/P1P1Kb1p/1R3P1P/r7/5B2 w - - 0 63[/fen]


63 moves into the game and so far it seemed most likely that W3X Chessmaster 4000 would win this game especially after having worked its Rook behind the enemy lines. In the above position 63. ... Ra1! was very dangerous, threatening after 64. Bd3 to play 64. Re1+ followed by Rd1 where white's King is forced to move to d5. Once you get to this position, Black moving the pawn to e4! is very dangerous as subsequent moves not only trap the King but also allows black's Rook to work its way back to d8 with checkmate threats. Yes, I know its all very complicated and W3X Chessmaster 4000 must have thought the same as it blunders in this position with the move 63. ... Kc6? which ultimately after moving the pawn to d7 allows DB Rebel 6 Active to breakthrough taking the pawn on b6.


CRITICAL POSITION 2

[fen]4k3/8/5R2/p1pKpP2/2P2b1p/3B1P1P/8/4r3 w - - 0 72[/fen]

So now a few moves later DB Rebel 6 Active looks most likely to win this game. W3X Chessmaster 4000 needs play 72. ... Rd1! with drawing chances. The move 72. ... Ke7 was bad and DB Rebel 6 Active wins.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]2R2Q2/8/3K2k1/p2Bp3/7p/5P2/8/1r6 w - - 0 85[/fen]

This game shows that if you are going to beat DB Rebel 6 Active then you had better do it in the middlegame as in the endgame it plays better than its competition in this tournament.

So lets see what DB Rebel 6 Active looks like:

Image


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Rebel 6 Active, 30S. (2400)
5 Inaccuracies
1 Mistakes
0 Blunders
16 Average centipawn loss

W3X Chessmaster 4000, 30S. (2300)
9 Inaccuracies
3 Mistakes
1 Blunders
28 Average centipawn loss



Round 7 Game 2:

DB Chess Genius 1 - AM68060 Sargon 3

RESULT: 1/2-1/2

CLICK BELOW TO REPLAY GAME

https://lichess.org/9fdSUorH


CRITICAL POSITION

[fen]6k1/5pp1/5n1p/3q4/3PpN2/1p2P1P1/5P1P/2Q3K1 w - - 0 35[/fen]


AM68060 Sargon 3 had a chance to win this game in this position and surprisingly missed it. The winning move is 35. ... Qb5! after which 36. Qb2 is forced. Follow this with 36. ... Qa4 and 37. ... Qa2 and the win is assured for Black. AM68060 Sargon 3 played 35. ... Qa5 missing the win and DB Chess Genius 1 played good defence.


FINAL POSITION

[fen]8/8/8/6k1/6p1/8/6K1/8 w - - 0 74[/fen]

DB Chess Genius 1 has been playing well in this tournament with good defence and therefore deserves a pic:

Image


GAME QUALITY SUMMARY

DB Chess Genius 1, 30S. (2200)
3 Inaccuracies
1 Mistakes
0 Blunders
9 Average centipawn loss

AM68060 Sargon 3, 30S. (2467)
1 Inaccuracies
2 Mistakes
0 Blunders
8 Average centipawn loss


Best regards
Nick
jupiter6
Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 5:38 am

Post by jupiter6 »

Hi, any updates?
Post Reply