Uly - 64x
Re: Ovyron - 64x
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Bd7 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O b5 9. Nxc6 Bxc6 10. Qe3 Rc8 11. Kb1 Nd7 12. Nd5 h6 13. Bh4 g5 14. Bg3 Bg7 15. h4 Bxd5 16. exd5 Qb6 17. Qe2 Nc5 18. Re1 Rc7 19. Qe3 g4 20. f3 O-O 21. Bf4 Qa5 22. Qd2 b4 23. Bc4 Na4 24. Bb3 Bxb2 25. Bxh6 Bf6 26. Qf4 Rfc8 27. Qxg4+ Kh7 28. Qh5 Nc3+ 29. Kc1 Bg7 30. Bd2+ Kg8 31. Bxc3 Bxc3 32. Re2 Kf8 33. Kd1 Qa3 34. Re4 Qb2 35. Qh6+ Bg7 36. Qc1
Re: Ovyron - 64x
Have a few idle minutes idle, so I thought I would take the opportunity to say that these games have proven to be of great value.
After my IDeA debacle of Game 1 that left me with no desire to explore the endgame after your draw offer, I went with experimental settings for game 2. Sorry for my poor opening game, wanted to avoid B9X and C2X (due to the Quijote-Knights game).
Once in C60 IDeA went mostly unattended. I only steered it towards positions that I thought your disclosed analysis techniques would find confusing. I found its choices mostly satisfactory, yet not stellar. Still went along.
20..Kf8 was superior, but wanted to keep testing the above and reopened the game with 20..0-0 and 21..Qa5. Failed to spend the time to realize the resulting position wouldn't have the necessary depth. After my draw offer I did a 180 on the approach. I will very much enjoy (although in a different way) the rest of the game.
In any case the resulting notes will be of great value to my tournament play. Found a use for IDeA (maybe not the one it was intended for) and reduced the number of GUIs and engines to a minimum.
You are a great lab partner and have my respect. Many thanks.
After my IDeA debacle of Game 1 that left me with no desire to explore the endgame after your draw offer, I went with experimental settings for game 2. Sorry for my poor opening game, wanted to avoid B9X and C2X (due to the Quijote-Knights game).
Once in C60 IDeA went mostly unattended. I only steered it towards positions that I thought your disclosed analysis techniques would find confusing. I found its choices mostly satisfactory, yet not stellar. Still went along.
20..Kf8 was superior, but wanted to keep testing the above and reopened the game with 20..0-0 and 21..Qa5. Failed to spend the time to realize the resulting position wouldn't have the necessary depth. After my draw offer I did a 180 on the approach. I will very much enjoy (although in a different way) the rest of the game.
In any case the resulting notes will be of great value to my tournament play. Found a use for IDeA (maybe not the one it was intended for) and reduced the number of GUIs and engines to a minimum.
You are a great lab partner and have my respect. Many thanks.
Re: Ovyron - 64x
Btw, I firmly believe that your methods and interactive analysis are superior than IDeA, no question about it. Certainly orders of magnitude more efficient CPU cycle for CPU cycle.
Re: Ovyron - 64x
Thanks a lot! I maintain that this game with you is the most interesting game I'm currently playing, mainly because of the beautiful variations that we didn't get to play, but that were there, like both putting our rooks where they can be captured by a bishop, then both rejecting the sacrifices, or pieces deeply pinned that just can't move so one can go around them, etc. it's stunning to see the possibilities. I'm very impressed to know that IDEA unassisted took part on the credit from your part.
As for what I did in this game, I kept doing 180s on my approaches, because when an analysis method wouldn't have beaten you even if you played carelessly, I discarded it and tried something different, which in this game happened significantly often, so I played pretty much as if I had a severe personality disorder, choosing moves very differently every time that happened
You ended playing against some super-optimistic hybrid analysis method that I had to come up with, but I have ran out of ideas, what is left to try leads to self-refutation which would be pointless, so if I hit a clear 0.00 with this, I'm going to accept your long pending draw offer
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Bd7 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O b5 9. Nxc6 Bxc6 10. Qe3 Rc8 11. Kb1 Nd7 12. Nd5 h6 13. Bh4 g5 14. Bg3 Bg7 15. h4 Bxd5 16. exd5 Qb6 17. Qe2 Nc5 18. Re1 Rc7 19. Qe3 g4 20. f3 O-O 21. Bf4 Qa5 22. Qd2 b4 23. Bc4 Na4 24. Bb3 Bxb2 25. Bxh6 Bf6 26. Qf4 Rfc8 27. Qxg4+ Kh7 28. Qh5 Nc3+ 29. Kc1 Bg7 30. Bd2+ Kg8 31. Bxc3 Bxc3 32. Re2 Kf8 33. Kd1 Qa3 34. Re4 Qb2 35. Qh6+ Bg7 36. Qc1 Qf6 37. Ke1
As for what I did in this game, I kept doing 180s on my approaches, because when an analysis method wouldn't have beaten you even if you played carelessly, I discarded it and tried something different, which in this game happened significantly often, so I played pretty much as if I had a severe personality disorder, choosing moves very differently every time that happened
You ended playing against some super-optimistic hybrid analysis method that I had to come up with, but I have ran out of ideas, what is left to try leads to self-refutation which would be pointless, so if I hit a clear 0.00 with this, I'm going to accept your long pending draw offer
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Bd7 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O b5 9. Nxc6 Bxc6 10. Qe3 Rc8 11. Kb1 Nd7 12. Nd5 h6 13. Bh4 g5 14. Bg3 Bg7 15. h4 Bxd5 16. exd5 Qb6 17. Qe2 Nc5 18. Re1 Rc7 19. Qe3 g4 20. f3 O-O 21. Bf4 Qa5 22. Qd2 b4 23. Bc4 Na4 24. Bb3 Bxb2 25. Bxh6 Bf6 26. Qf4 Rfc8 27. Qxg4+ Kh7 28. Qh5 Nc3+ 29. Kc1 Bg7 30. Bd2+ Kg8 31. Bxc3 Bxc3 32. Re2 Kf8 33. Kd1 Qa3 34. Re4 Qb2 35. Qh6+ Bg7 36. Qc1 Qf6 37. Ke1
Re: Ovyron - 64x
Impressive. Your move picks were 90% IDeA's top choice, the rest were it's second choice. Only one move was 3rd and one another had effect in evals contrary to IDeA's expectations.
Do not take me wrong. This is the most CPU-time demanding game I have come across. I wanted to validate IDeA as a possible way to automate AN and was doing analysis in parallel. Once decided on the shape and quality of the tree, I bowed never to seed, green or red a move.
When I was not happy with the assessment I just told IDeA to go 1 level deeper until the point came that the pick was acceptable to me. Twice during the game this took over 36 hours DEDICATED! But once settled on the minimum depth the rest was fairly automatic.
A few times I had to pick between equal moves, that is when I steered the game towards the positions I felt would be more difficult for you to AN. It was scary to have my King out in the open with your Q and B right besides it though.
Compare that with the few minutes it takes you to generate and pick moves. I think that speaks for itself.
Anyways, IDeA is no longer running, and I think it will be a while before you see a 0.00 as your position will be evaluated better from this point on. Luckly, there is enough material on each side to refute/counterattack as you have mentioned.
Also going for my situation is that my king is back in its fortress while yours is out, and I have the right bishop for your passed pawn.
Hope you don't mind my commentary. I just find this experience fascinating.
My move:a5
Do not take me wrong. This is the most CPU-time demanding game I have come across. I wanted to validate IDeA as a possible way to automate AN and was doing analysis in parallel. Once decided on the shape and quality of the tree, I bowed never to seed, green or red a move.
When I was not happy with the assessment I just told IDeA to go 1 level deeper until the point came that the pick was acceptable to me. Twice during the game this took over 36 hours DEDICATED! But once settled on the minimum depth the rest was fairly automatic.
A few times I had to pick between equal moves, that is when I steered the game towards the positions I felt would be more difficult for you to AN. It was scary to have my King out in the open with your Q and B right besides it though.
Compare that with the few minutes it takes you to generate and pick moves. I think that speaks for itself.
Anyways, IDeA is no longer running, and I think it will be a while before you see a 0.00 as your position will be evaluated better from this point on. Luckly, there is enough material on each side to refute/counterattack as you have mentioned.
Also going for my situation is that my king is back in its fortress while yours is out, and I have the right bishop for your passed pawn.
Hope you don't mind my commentary. I just find this experience fascinating.
My move:a5
Re: Ovyron - 64x
Of course I like your commentary, it's what makes these games more interesting, when Slumdog invited me to join FICGS to play, the reason I declined was that they don't allow players to post commentary on the moves like this
Maybe the reason I utterly failed with IDEA is that I wanted quick results like the ones I have with IA and interaction, never would I put it to analyze 36 hours straight, nor even 10 times less than that. And I never ponder, I post my move and forget about the game till my opponent replies, so really I could never find a use for IDEA for anything.
Thanks for your comments and I'm glad we're both enjoying this game
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Bd7 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O b5 9. Nxc6 Bxc6 10. Qe3 Rc8 11. Kb1 Nd7 12. Nd5 h6 13. Bh4 g5 14. Bg3 Bg7 15. h4 Bxd5 16. exd5 Qb6 17. Qe2 Nc5 18. Re1 Rc7 19. Qe3 g4 20. f3 O-O 21. Bf4 Qa5 22. Qd2 b4 23. Bc4 Na4 24. Bb3 Bxb2 25. Bxh6 Bf6 26. Qf4 Rfc8 27. Qxg4+ Kh7 28. Qh5 Nc3+ 29. Kc1 Bg7 30. Bd2+ Kg8 31. Bxc3 Bxc3 32. Re2 Kf8 33. Kd1 Qa3 34. Re4 Qb2 35. Qh6+ Bg7 36. Qc1 Qf6 37. Ke1 a5 38. Kf2
Maybe the reason I utterly failed with IDEA is that I wanted quick results like the ones I have with IA and interaction, never would I put it to analyze 36 hours straight, nor even 10 times less than that. And I never ponder, I post my move and forget about the game till my opponent replies, so really I could never find a use for IDEA for anything.
Thanks for your comments and I'm glad we're both enjoying this game
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Bd7 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O b5 9. Nxc6 Bxc6 10. Qe3 Rc8 11. Kb1 Nd7 12. Nd5 h6 13. Bh4 g5 14. Bg3 Bg7 15. h4 Bxd5 16. exd5 Qb6 17. Qe2 Nc5 18. Re1 Rc7 19. Qe3 g4 20. f3 O-O 21. Bf4 Qa5 22. Qd2 b4 23. Bc4 Na4 24. Bb3 Bxb2 25. Bxh6 Bf6 26. Qf4 Rfc8 27. Qxg4+ Kh7 28. Qh5 Nc3+ 29. Kc1 Bg7 30. Bd2+ Kg8 31. Bxc3 Bxc3 32. Re2 Kf8 33. Kd1 Qa3 34. Re4 Qb2 35. Qh6+ Bg7 36. Qc1 Qf6 37. Ke1 a5 38. Kf2
Re: Ovyron - 64x
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Bd7 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O b5 9. Nxc6 Bxc6 10. Qe3 Rc8 11. Kb1 Nd7 12. Nd5 h6 13. Bh4 g5 14. Bg3 Bg7 15. h4 Bxd5 16. exd5 Qb6 17. Qe2 Nc5 18. Re1 Rc7 19. Qe3 g4 20. f3 O-O 21. Bf4 Qa5 22. Qd2 b4 23. Bc4 Na4 24. Bb3 Bxb2 25. Bxh6 Bf6 26. Qf4 Rfc8 27. Qxg4+ Kh7 28. Qh5 Nc3+ 29. Kc1 Bg7 30. Bd2+ Kg8 31. Bxc3 Bxc3 32. Re2 Kf8 33. Kd1 Qa3 34. Re4 Qb2 35. Qh6+ Bg7 36. Qc1 Qf6 37. Ke1 a5 38. Kf2 Rc3 39. Qd2
Re: Ovyron - 64x
Well I also consider I failed with IDeA. No way I can dedicate that kind of CPU time to one game just to obtain the same or inferior results. Also, I struggle to align my AN to Quijote, and they are more experienced in using it.
39..Bh6
39..Bh6