Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Harvey Williamson, bob

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
Look
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 12:14 pm
Location: Iran
Full name: Mehdi Amini
Contact:

Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by Look » Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:58 am

Hi,

Just one position from one of the craziest games I've ever seen:



What would go on after 19.Nbd2 rather than 19.Nh4

The game that deserves much attention:


zullil
Posts: 5552
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by zullil » Sun Aug 04, 2019 1:14 pm

Look wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:58 am
Hi,

Just one position from one of the craziest games I've ever seen:



What would go on after 19.Nbd2 rather than 19.Nh4
A quick analysis using Cfish-dev suggests the line

19. Nbd2 Rf8 20. Nh4 Ncxe5 21. fxe5 Nxe5 22. Ng6+ Nxg6 23. Bxg6 Be5 24. Qxh8 Bg3+ 25. Kd1 Rxh8 26. Bd3 Bc8 27. Nf1 Bd6 28. g6 Kf6

leading to

Searching this position gives

+0.30 29. b3 e5 30. Bb2 Bc5 31. Kd2 Rh5 32. Be2 Rh3 33. Re1 Kxg6 34. Bd1 e4 35. Re2 Kg5 36. Rg2+ Kf4 37. Be2 Bf5 38. Ke1 Rh1 39. Rg7 Ke5 40. Rg8 Kf4 41. Ba6 e3 42. Bd3 Bg4 43. Rg7 Bb6 44. Rf7+ Ke5 45. Re7+ Kf4 46. Be2 Bf5 47. Rf7 Ke5 48. Bf3 Rg1 49. Ke2 Bxc2 50. Nxe3 Be4 51. Bxe4 dxe4 52. Rd7 Ke6 53. Rxd4 Bxd4 54. Bxd4 Rg5 55. Nc4 Rg2+ 56. Bf2 Rh2 57. Ke3 (depth 45, 0:04:36)

So, with correct play, it seems the original outcome of 1/2-1/2 should still occur.

zullil
Posts: 5552
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by zullil » Sun Aug 04, 2019 1:47 pm

zullil wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 1:14 pm
Look wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:58 am
Hi,

Just one position from one of the craziest games I've ever seen:



What would go on after 19.Nbd2 rather than 19.Nh4
A quick analysis using Cfish-dev suggests the line

19. Nbd2 Rf8 20. Nh4 Ncxe5 21. fxe5 Nxe5 22. Ng6+ Nxg6 23. Bxg6 Be5 24. Qxh8 Bg3+ 25. Kd1 Rxh8 26. Bd3 Bc8 27. Nf1 Bd6 28. g6 Kf6

leading to

Searching this position gives

+0.30 29. b3 e5 30. Bb2 Bc5 31. Kd2 Rh5 32. Be2 Rh3 33. Re1 Kxg6 34. Bd1 e4 35. Re2 Kg5 36. Rg2+ Kf4 37. Be2 Bf5 38. Ke1 Rh1 39. Rg7 Ke5 40. Rg8 Kf4 41. Ba6 e3 42. Bd3 Bg4 43. Rg7 Bb6 44. Rf7+ Ke5 45. Re7+ Kf4 46. Be2 Bf5 47. Rf7 Ke5 48. Bf3 Rg1 49. Ke2 Bxc2 50. Nxe3 Be4 51. Bxe4 dxe4 52. Rd7 Ke6 53. Rxd4 Bxd4 54. Bxd4 Rg5 55. Nc4 Rg2+ 56. Bf2 Rh2 57. Ke3 (depth 45, 0:04:36)

So, with correct play, it seems the original outcome of 1/2-1/2 should still occur.
Lc0 agrees with Cfish's line above, and gives the following evaluation of the resulting position:

Code: Select all

HALTED Nodes: 56.4M, N/s: 49.8k, Time: 5m 3s

61.7% b3 e5 Bb2 Bg4+ Kd2 Rh3 Re1 Bf3 Be2 Be4 Kc1 Bf8 Nd2 Bh6 Kd1 Bxd2 Kxd2 Kxg6 Kc1 Rh2 Kb1 Kf6 Bc1 a5 Bd3 Bxd3 cxd3 Rh3 Rd1 Kf5 Kc2 Rh2+ Rd2 Rh8 Rf2+ Ke6 Rg2 Kf5 Rg5+ Kf6 Rg2 Kf5 a4 bxa3 Bxa3 Rc8+ Kb2 e4 Rc2 Rh8 Bc5 exd3 Rd2 Ke4 (N: 53.9M, P: 3.34%)
59.8% c4 dxc3 bxc3 bxc3 Ne3 Rh4 Rb1 Kg7 Kc2 Ra4 Kb3 Rh4 Kc2 Ra4 Rb3 Ba6 a3 Bxd3+ Kxd3 Kxg6 Rxc3 Bf4 Rc2 Kf7 Rf2 Ke8 Bb2 Bd6 Nc2 Rh4 Nd4 Rh3+ Rf3 Rxf3+ Nxf3 Kd7 Kc2 (N: 1.1M, P: 3.29%)
59.8% c3 dxc3 bxc3 bxc3 Ne3 Rh4 Rb1 Kg7 Kc2 d4 Nc4 Ba6 Kb3 Rh3 Kc2 Rh2+ Kb3 Rh3 Bg5 Rg3 Nxd6 Bxd3 Bf4 Rg4 Be5+ Kxg6 Re1 a5 a4 c2 Kb2 Bf5 Nxf5 Kxf5 Kxc2 d3+ Kxd3 Rxa4 Bc3 Rf4 Re5+ Kg6 Rxe6+ (N: 928k, P: 9.48%)
54.1% a3 b3 c3 Rh3 Bb5 a6 Ba4 a5 Bb5 dxc3 bxc3 a4 Rb1 Be5 Bb2 Kxg6 c4 Bf4 Ke1 dxc4 Bxc4 e5 Rd1 Bg4 Rd6+ Kg5 Rd5 Kf6 Ra5 Bd7 Ra7 (N: 278k, P: 29.75%)
52.4% Ke1 e5 b3 e4 Be2 Rh1 Bb2 Bg3+ Kd2 Bf4+ Ke1 Bg3+ Kd2 Bf4+ Ke1 Bg3+ (N: 93.5k, P: 12.24%)
39.7% Bd2 e5 a3 bxa3 bxa3 e4 Be2 Rh1 Rb1 Bh3 Rb7 Kxg6 Rxa7 Be5 Ra6+ Bf6 Ke1 Kf5 Rxf6+ Kxf6 a4 e3 Ba5 Bf5 Bb6 Ke5 Bc7+ Ke6 Bb6 Ke5 Bc7+ Kf6 Bb6 Ke5 (N: 27.7k, P: 8.57%)
47.4% g7 Kxg7 b3 e5 a3 Rh1 axb4 Bg4+ Ke1 e4 Be2 Bg3+ Kd2 Bf4+ Ke1 Bg3+ Kd2 Bf4+ Ke1 Bg3+ (N: 17.0k, P: 3.44%)
45.6% Be2 e5 a3 b3 c3 Bf5 cxd4 exd4 Ke1 Kxg6 Kf2 Be4 Bf3 Rf8 Nd2 d3 Kg2 Kf5 Nxb3 Be5 Nd2 Rh8 (N: 12.6k, P: 2.85%)
42.2% Bb5 e5 a3 b3 c3 dxc3 bxc3 Bf5 Bb2 Kxg6 Ke1 Be7 Rd1 Bh4+ Kd2 Bg5+ Ke1 Be4 Bd3 Kf5 Bxe4+ dxe4 (N: 8.1k, P: 2.24%)
34.5% Ke2 e5 a3 bxa3 Ke1 e4 Be2 Rh1 bxa3 Bg3+ Kd2 Bf4+ Ke1 Be5 Rb1 Kxg6 (N: 7.0k, P: 2.69%)
34.6% Kd2 e5 b3 e4 Bb2 Be5 Re1 exd3 cxd3 Bf5 g7 Rg8 Rxe5 Kxe5 Ne3 Rxg7 Bxd4+ Kxd4 Nxf5+ Ke5 (N: 5.9k, P: 2.24%)
31.2% a4 e5 b3 e4 Be2 Rh1 Bb2 Be5 Ke1 e3 Bf3 Rg1 g7 Kxg7 Rd1 Ba6 Be2 Bg3+ (N: 4.6k, P: 1.99%)
31.6% Rb1 e5 b3 e4 Be2 Rh1 Bb2 Be5 g7 Kxg7 Ke1 e3 Bf3 Rg1 Rd1 Ba6 Be2 Bg3+ (N: 4.3k, P: 1.82%)
3.8% Bg5+ Kxg5 a3 bxa3 Nd2 Kf6 Ke2 Rh2+ Kf3 Rxd2 Rg1 (N: 3.3k, P: 2.70%)
30.5% Nd2 e5 a3 b3 Nxb3 Bg4+ Ke1 e4 Nxd4 exd3 Kd2 Rh3 cxd3 Be5 g7 Kxg7 Kc3 Rh1 Rb1 Kf7 b4 (N: 2.9k, P: 1.29%)
2.9% Bh6 Rxh6 a3 bxa3 bxa3 e5 Rb1 e4 Rb5 exd3 Rxd5 dxc2+ (N: 2.3k, P: 1.91%)
6.1% Ng3 Bxg3 Ke2 e5 Kf3 Bh4 a3 b3 c3 e4+ (N: 1.6k, P: 1.29%)
1.2% Bf5 exf5 a3 b3 cxb3 Kxg6 Bg5 Kxg5 Kd2 f4 (N: 1.6k, P: 1.40%)
2.1% Bf4 Bxf4 a3 b3 cxb3 e5 Bc2 e4 Bxe4 dxe4 Ne3 (N: 1.6k, P: 1.32%)
1.7% Be4 dxe4 g7 Kxg7 a3 b3 Bh6+ Kf7 Be3 dxe3 (N: 1.4k, P: 1.17%)
1.9% Ba6 Bxa6 g7 Kxg7 c3 dxc3 a3 b3 bxc3 (N: 1.4k, P: 1.16%)
5.7% Be3 dxe3 Nxe3 Rh1+ Nf1 e5 Kd2 e4 Bb5 Bf4+ Ke1 Kxg6 Rd1 (N: 1.3k, P: 1.00%)
4.3% Nh2 Rxh2 Bg5+ Kg7 Rc1 e5 c4 Bg4+ Ke1 e4 Bf1 (N: 1.2k, P: 1.00%)
6.0% Ne3 dxe3 Bxe3 Rh1+ Ke2 Rxa1 Bg5+ Kg7 Bf6+ Kxf6 Bf5 Rxa2 c4 Ra1 (N: 1.1k, P: 0.90%)
1.6% Bc4 dxc4 Nd2 Rh1+ Ke2 Rh2+ Kf1 Bc7 a3 (N: 1.1k, P: 0.93%)

User avatar
Eelco de Groot
Posts: 4131
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:40 am
Location: Groningen

Re: Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by Eelco de Groot » Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:00 pm

61.7% chance of win is not so bad. Black's doubled pawn does not look so strong, so white N against pawn or against two pawns, maybe some of those positions should be won.

For instance at the end of some PVs in one line is at least +1.00
8/p7/8/2bppk2/1p1p4/1P6/P1P1N3/2BK4 b - -

Engine: Kaissa IV NoContempt (512 MB)
by T. Romstad, M. Costalba, J. Kiiski, G. Linscott

24/64 0:01 +0.51 1...a5 2.Bh6 Bd6 3.Bg7 Kg6 4.Bh8 Kf5
5.Nc1 Be7 6.Bg7 Bd6 7.Ke2 Kg6 8.Bh8 Kf5
9.Kd2 Be7 10.Bg7 Bf6 11.Bxf6 Kxf6
12.Nd3 Ke6 13.Nc5+ Kd6 (3.849.251) 2132
...

53/109 23:25 +1.11 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 Kf3 3.Nc1 Bd6 4.Nd3 a5
5.Kd2 Bb8 6.Nc5 Ba7 7.Ne6 Bb6 8.Ng5+ Kf4
9.Nf7 Bc7 10.Kd3 Kf5 11.Bc1 Ke6
12.Ng5+ Kf5 13.Ke2 Bd8 14.Nh3 Ke6 (3.192.885.612) 2271

54/108 24:55 +1.21-- 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 (3.374.682.909) 2255

54/108 27:29 +1.30-- 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 (3.688.603.847) 2236

In the line 29. b3 e5 30. Bb2 Kaissa give no more than 0.46 though, but no 30... Bc5



Engine: Kaissa IV NoContempt (one thread, no tablebases, 512 MB)
by T. Romstad, M. Costalba, J. Kiiski, G. Linscott

36 10:48 +0.46 2...Rh4 3.Kd2 Bc5 4.a3 Be6 5.axb4 Bxb4+
6.c3 dxc3+ 7.Bxc3 Bxc3+ 8.Kxc3 Rh3
9.Kd2 e4 10.Bc2 Rf3 11.Ke1 Rc3
12.Bd1 Kxg6 13.Rxa7 Kf5 14.b4 Ke5
15.b5 Rc4 (1.070.067.855) 1650

36 10:48 +0.61 2...Bg4+ 3.Be2 Bxe2+ 4.Kxe2 Kxg6
5.Re1 Kf5 6.Nd2 Rh2+ 7.Kd1 Rf2 8.Rf1 Rxf1+
9.Nxf1 Be7 10.Ke2 Bh4 11.Nd2 Bf6
12.Nf3 a5 13.Bc1 e4 14.Ne1 Bg5
15.Bxg5 Kxg5 (1.070.067.855) 1650

36 10:48 +0.72 2...Kg7 3.a3 Bg4+ 4.Ke1 Rf8 5.Be2 Bf5
6.axb4 Bxb4+ 7.Kd1 a5 8.Ba3 Rc8
9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.cxd3 Rc3 11.Bxb4 axb4
12.Ke2 Kxg6 13.Nd2 e4 14.Ra5 e3
15.Nf3 Rc2+ (1.070.067.855) 1650

35 10:48 +0.68 2...Be6 3.Ke1 (1.070.067.855) 1650

35 10:48 +0.77 2...Rh6 3.Ke2 Rh4 4.a3 a5 5.axb4 Bxb4
6.Kf2 Rf4+ 7.Kg2 Rg4+ 8.Ng3 Be6
9.Rf1+ Ke7 10.Bf5 Bxf5 11.Rxf5 Ke6
12.Bc1 Rxg6 13.Rg5 Rxg5 14.Bxg5 e4
15.Kf2 Bc5 (1.070.067.855) 1650

35 10:48 +0.81 2...Bd7 3.Ke2 Be8 4.Re1 Bxg6 5.Bxg6 Kxg6
6.Nd2 Rh2+ 7.Kd1 Rf2 8.Rg1+ Kf6
9.Rf1 Rxf1+ 10.Nxf1 Be7 11.Ng3 Kg5
12.Ne2 Kg4 13.Nc1 Bd6 14.Ke2 Kf4
15.Kd2 Kf5 (1.070.067.855) 1650
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first
place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you
are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan

Look
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 12:14 pm
Location: Iran
Full name: Mehdi Amini
Contact:

Re: Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by Look » Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:03 pm

Some moves later:



Instead of played 22.Ndf3 the move 22.Nb3 or 22.Nhf3

zullil
Posts: 5552
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by zullil » Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:53 pm

Look wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:03 pm
Some moves later:



Instead of played 22.Ndf3 the move 22.Nb3 or 22.Nhf3
Lc0 considers both those move to be significantly better than Ndf3. Both moves offer about an 83% chance of White winning, according to the following:

Code: Select all

HALTED Nodes: 50.1M, N/s: 39.9k, Time: 20m 55s

82.8% Nb3 Bc4 Nc5 Kb6 Na4+ Kc7 b3 Bb5 Nc5 Kb6 a4 Ba6 Nxa6 Kxa6 Bb2 Nd7 O-O-O Rc8 Qe2+ Kb7 Nf3 Qf8 Nxd4 Qxf4+ Kb1 Nxd4 Rxd4 Qf5 Rd1 Nxe5 Rf1 Qg5 Qb5+ Ka8 Qa6 Rc6 Qe2 Qg3 Bd4 Qg5 Rg1 Qf6 Rf1 Qg5 Bg8 Qg3 Bf7 Nc4 Bxg7 Na3+ Ka1 Nxc2+ Ka2 Ne3 (N: 26.3M, P: 21.89%)
82.9% Nhf3 Nd7 Nb3 Rf8 Ng5 Re8 Bd2 Bc4 Qh3 Bxb3 cxb3 Nc5 Rc1 Kb6 Rxc5 Kxc5 Nxe6+ Kb6 Qf5 Re7 Kf2 a5 a4 Qe8 Ng5 Qb8 Nf3 Qd8 Kg3 Re8 Ng5 Rf8 Qe6 Re8 Qf7 Re7 Qf5 Re8 Ne6 Qd7 Nxg7 Qxg7 Qf7 Qh8 Qf6 Kc5 Qxh8 Rxh8 Kg4 (N: 23.7M, P: 9.05%)
65.2% a3 Nd7 Qg4 b3 Nxb3 Bxe5 Nf3 Bf6 f5 exf5 Bf4+ Kb6 Qxf5 Re8+ Kf2 Nde5 Bxe5 Nxe5 Re1 d3 Kg2 dxc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Qxc2 Bc4 Nd2 Qf6 Nxc4+ dxc4 (N: 62.4k, P: 16.70%)
56.5% Ndf3 Nd7 Kf2 Qf8 Kg2 Qc5 Bd2 Be2 Rc1 Re8 Qg4 Qc4 b3 Qa6 Qh3 Nc5 f5 exf5 Nxf5 Bxf3+ Qxf3 Nxe5 (N: 48.5k, P: 19.38%)
65.9% Kf2 Nd7 Nb3 Qf8 Nf3 Re8 Qh3 Nc5 Kg2 Nxb3 axb3 Be2 Ng5 Qc5 c3 dxc3 Nxe6+ Rxe6 Qxe6 Qd4 bxc3 Qe4+ Kh2 Qf3 Qh3 Qf2+ (N: 8.8k, P: 2.26%)
55.0% a4 Nd7 Nhf3 d3 Nb3 dxc2 Be3 Qe8 Qh2 Bd3 Rc1 Rc8 Rxc2 Bxc2 Qxc2 Kb8 Qd3 (N: 5.4k, P: 2.26%)
53.7% Kd1 Nd7 Nhf3 Qb8 Ng5 Nc5 Nb3 Qb5 Qf3 Re8 Nxc5 Qxc5 Bd2 Kb8 Rc1 Qb6 b3 Bb5 Nf7 Rf8 Qg3 Qa6 (N: 5.2k, P: 2.28%)
46.2% b3 Nd7 Ndf3 Qf8 Bd2 Re8 Qg4 Nc5 Ng5 Qe7 Nhf3 Ne4 Rc1 Kb8 Qg1 Qc5 (N: 3.6k, P: 2.01%)
50.2% Rb1 Nd7 Nb3 Qb8 Bd2 Qb5 Kf2 Nc5 Kg2 Ne4 Re1 d3 cxd3 Qxd3 Qf3 Qc2 Qd1 Qxb2 (N: 3.4k, P: 1.70%)
47.0% Nf1 Nd7 Nf3 Qf8 Bd2 d3 c3 bxc3 bxc3 Rb8 Nd4 Nc5 Qg4 Kd7 Ng3 Rb2 Rd1 Rxa2 (N: 3.4k, P: 1.85%)
43.1% Ng2 Nd7 Nf3 Qf8 Bd2 Nc5 Ng5 Re8 O-O-O d3 Ne1 dxc2 Nxc2 b3 (N: 3.2k, P: 1.92%)
29.6% Qg4 Nxh7 gxh7 Qxh7 Ndf3 Rg8 Qxe6 Bxe5 Qf5 Qxf5 Nxf5 Bf6 Kf2 d3 Ne3 Kd6 cxd3 Bxd3 Ng5 Rf8 Kg3 (N: 2.6k, P: 2.09%)
30.9% Nb1 Nd7 Nd2 Qf8 Qg4 Re8 Ndf3 Qc5 Qg2 Kb7 Qf2 Rf8 Bd2 Qxc2 Rc1 Qe4+ Kd1 (N: 1.9k, P: 1.46%)
24.5% Qg5 Nxh7 gxh7 Qxh7 Ndf3 Rg8 Qg6 Qxg6 Nxg6 Bh6 f5 Be3 f6 Nd8 Bxe3 dxe3 Nf4 Rg4 Nd3 Rg2 (N: 1.8k, P: 1.59%)
33.8% c4 dxc3 Nb3 Nd7 Nf3 Qf8 Nfd4 Nxd4 Nxd4 Re8 Qh3 Nxe5 fxe5 Bxe5 bxc3 (N: 1.7k, P: 1.25%)
34.3% c3 dxc3 Nb3 Nd7 Nf3 Qf8 Be3 Re8 bxc3 bxc3 Rc1 Qb4 Kf2 Bc4 Nbd4 Nc5 (N: 1.6k, P: 1.20%)
10.9% Qf3 Nxg6 Nxg6 Qxh7 Qg4 Rg8 Nf3 Bf8 Nxf8 Qe4+ Kf2 Rxg4 Nxe6+ (N: 1.5k, P: 1.63%)
28.7% f5 Bxe5 Ndf3 d3 cxd3 Bxd3 fxe6 Nxe6 Nxe5 Nxe5 Nf3 Nxf3+ Qxf3 Qe5+ Qe3 Be4 g7 Qxg7 Bxe4 dxe4 Bd2 (N: 1.5k, P: 1.19%)
13.7% Nf5 exf5 Qxf5 Nd7 Nf3 Rf8 Qh3 Nc5 Bd2 Bc8 Qg2 (N: 1.2k, P: 1.21%)
0.8% Qe2 Bxe2 Nf1 Nxh7 a4 bxa3 Rxa3 Nf8 Rg3 Qxh4 (N: 1.1k, P: 1.35%)
12.7% Qd1 Nxh7 Qg4 Nf8 Ndf3 d3 cxd3 Bxd3 Be3 Kb7 Rc1 Rc8 Kf2 Rc7 (N: 965, P: 1.02%)
1.7% Qh6 Bxh6 Nf1 Nxh7 Bd2 Nf8 a4 bxa3 Rxa3 Bxf4 (N: 896, P: 1.10%)
2.4% Ne4 dxe4 a3 b3 cxb3 e3 b4 Rd8 b3 Nxe5 fxe5 (N: 892, P: 1.09%)
6.8% Nc4 dxc4 Nf3 Nd7 Ng5 Re8 Nf7 Qf8 Nd6 Rd8 Nf7 Rb8 (N: 770, P: 0.89%)
0.5% Bg8 Qxh5 Ndf3 Nxg6 Bf7 Qxh4+ Nxh4 Nxh4 Bd2 (N: 679, P: 0.85%)
1.3% Qf5 exf5 a4 Nxh7 Ng2 Nf8 Nh4 Qxh4+ Kd1 Qxf4 (N: 634, P: 0.78%)

User avatar
Eelco de Groot
Posts: 4131
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:40 am
Location: Groningen

Re: Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by Eelco de Groot » Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:24 am

Eelco de Groot wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:00 pm
61.7% chance of win is not so bad. Black's doubled pawn does not look so strong, so white N against pawn or against two pawns, maybe some of those positions should be won.

For instance at the end of some PVs in one line is at least +1.00
8/p7/8/2bppk2/1p1p4/1P6/P1P1N3/2BK4 b - -

Engine: Kaissa IV NoContempt (512 MB)
by T. Romstad, M. Costalba, J. Kiiski, G. Linscott

24/64 0:01 +0.51 1...a5 2.Bh6 Bd6 3.Bg7 Kg6 4.Bh8 Kf5
5.Nc1 Be7 6.Bg7 Bd6 7.Ke2 Kg6 8.Bh8 Kf5
9.Kd2 Be7 10.Bg7 Bf6 11.Bxf6 Kxf6
12.Nd3 Ke6 13.Nc5+ Kd6 (3.849.251) 2132
...

53/109 23:25 +1.11 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 Kf3 3.Nc1 Bd6 4.Nd3 a5
5.Kd2 Bb8 6.Nc5 Ba7 7.Ne6 Bb6 8.Ng5+ Kf4
9.Nf7 Bc7 10.Kd3 Kf5 11.Bc1 Ke6
12.Ng5+ Kf5 13.Ke2 Bd8 14.Nh3 Ke6 (3.192.885.612) 2271

54/108 24:55 +1.21-- 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 (3.374.682.909) 2255

54/108 27:29 +1.30-- 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 (3.688.603.847) 2236
(19. Nbd2 Rf8 20. Nh4 Ncxe5
21. fxe5 Nxe5 22. Ng6+ Nxg6 23. Bxg6 Be5 24. Qxh8 Bg3+
25. Kd1 Rxh8 26. Bd3 Bc8, as in Louis' line also)
That position was at the end of 27.Nf1 Bd6 28.g6 Kf6 29.b3 e5 30.Bb2 Bg4+ 31.Be2 Bxe2+ 32.Kxe2 Kxg6 33.Re1 Kf5 34.Nd2 Rh2+ 35.Kd1 Rf2 36.Rf1 Rxf1+ 37.Nxf1 Bc5 38.Ng3+ Kg4 39.Ne2 Kf5 40.Bc1 which was not a very deep line and it changed immediately after this, but the end position I think is won for White:


8/p7/8/2bppk2/1p1p4/1P6/P1P1N3/2BK4 b - -
.
.
.
63/110 120:46 +2.23 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 Ke3 3.Nc1 Bd6 4.Nd3 Kf3
5.Kd2 a5 6.Kd1 Bc7 7.Ke1 Bb8 8.Nc5 Ba7
9.Ne6 Bb6 10.Bc1 Ke4 11.Kd1 Kf5
12.Ng5 Bc5 13.Ke2 Be7 14.Nf3 Bf6 (15.450.314.642) 2132

64/110 158:58 +2.24 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 Ke3 3.Nc1 Bd6 4.Nd3 Kf3
5.Kd2 a5 6.Kd1 Bc7 7.Ke1 Bb8 8.Nc5 Ba7
9.Ne6 Bb6 10.Bc1 Ke4 11.Ke2 Kf5
12.Ng5 Bc5 13.Nh3 Ba7 14.Bd2 Bc5 (20.360.713.182) 2134

65/90 166:02 +2.24 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 Ke3 3.Nc1 Bd6 4.Nd3 Kf3
5.Kd2 a5 6.Kd1 Bc7 7.Ke1 Bb8 8.Nc5 Ba7
9.Ne6 Bb6 10.Bc1 Ke4 11.Ke2 Kf5
12.Ng5 Bc5 13.Nh3 Be7 14.Nf2 Ke6 (21.325.827.407) 2140

66/90 169:20 +2.24 1...Ke4 2.Bb2 Ke3 3.Nc1 Bd6 4.Nd3 Kf3
5.Kd2 a5 6.Kd1 Bc7 7.Ke1 Bb8 8.Nc5 Ba7
9.Ne6 Bb6 10.Bc1 Ke4 11.Ke2 Kf5
12.Ng5 Bc5 13.Nh3 Be7 14.Nf2 Ke6 (21.760.675.433) 2141

best move: Kf5-e4 time: 169:20.687 min n/s: 2.141.663 nodes: 21.760.675.433

In the line 29. b3 e5 30. Bb2 Kaissa give no more than 0.46 though, but no 30... Bc5



Engine: Kaissa IV NoContempt (one thread, no tablebases, 512 MB)
by T. Romstad, M. Costalba, J. Kiiski, G. Linscott

36 10:48 +0.46 2...Rh4 3.Kd2 Bc5 4.a3 Be6 5.axb4 Bxb4+
6.c3 dxc3+ 7.Bxc3 Bxc3+ 8.Kxc3 Rh3
9.Kd2 e4 10.Bc2 Rf3 11.Ke1 Rc3
12.Bd1 Kxg6 13.Rxa7 Kf5 14.b4 Ke5
15.b5 Rc4 (1.070.067.855) 1650

36 10:48 +0.61 2...Bg4+ 3.Be2 Bxe2+ 4.Kxe2 Kxg6
5.Re1 Kf5 6.Nd2 Rh2+ 7.Kd1 Rf2 8.Rf1 Rxf1+
9.Nxf1 Be7 10.Ke2 Bh4 11.Nd2 Bf6
12.Nf3 a5 13.Bc1 e4 14.Ne1 Bg5
15.Bxg5 Kxg5 (1.070.067.855) 1650

36 10:48 +0.72 2...Kg7 3.a3 Bg4+ 4.Ke1 Rf8 5.Be2 Bf5
6.axb4 Bxb4+ 7.Kd1 a5 8.Ba3 Rc8
9.Bd3 Bxd3 10.cxd3 Rc3 11.Bxb4 axb4
12.Ke2 Kxg6 13.Nd2 e4 14.Ra5 e3
15.Nf3 Rc2+ (1.070.067.855) 1650

35 10:48 +0.68 2...Be6 3.Ke1 (1.070.067.855) 1650

35 10:48 +0.77 2...Rh6 3.Ke2 Rh4 4.a3 a5 5.axb4 Bxb4
6.Kf2 Rf4+ 7.Kg2 Rg4+ 8.Ng3 Be6
9.Rf1+ Ke7 10.Bf5 Bxf5 11.Rxf5 Ke6
12.Bc1 Rxg6 13.Rg5 Rxg5 14.Bxg5 e4
15.Kf2 Bc5 (1.070.067.855) 1650

35 10:48 +0.81 2...Bd7 3.Ke2 Be8 4.Re1 Bxg6 5.Bxg6 Kxg6
6.Nd2 Rh2+ 7.Kd1 Rf2 8.Rg1+ Kf6
9.Rf1 Rxf1+ 10.Nxf1 Be7 11.Ng3 Kg5
12.Ne2 Kg4 13.Nc1 Bd6 14.Ke2 Kf4
15.Kd2 Kf5 (1.070.067.855) 1650
After a while 30... Bc5 came back up again and the result at depth 53



Engine: Kaissa IV NoContempt (512 MB)
by T. Romstad, M. Costalba, J. Kiiski, G. Linscott

53 698:51 +0.13 2...Bc5 3.a3 a5 4.axb4 Bxb4 5.Ke2 Rh4
6.Kf2 Be6 7.Ng3 Rf4+ 8.Kg1 Rg4
9.Rf1+ Ke7 10.Kh2 Rh4+ 11.Kg2 Rg4
12.Bf5 Bxf5 13.Rxf5 Ke6 14.Bc1 Rxg6
15.Rg5 Rxg5 (77.192.138.428) 1840

53 698:51 +0.61 2...Rh1 3.Ke2 Rh4 4.Ke1 Rg4 5.Rd1 Bf5
6.Bxf5 Kxf5 7.Nh2 Rxg6 8.Nf3 Be7
9.Kd2 Rg2+ 10.Kc1 Rg3 11.Rf1 Ke6
12.Ne1 a5 13.Kd1 Bf6 14.Nd3 Bg5
15.Bc1 Bxc1 (77.192.138.428) 1840

53 698:51 +0.64 2...Bf8 3.Ke1 Rh4 4.Rd1 Bh6 5.a3 Bf8
6.axb4 Bxb4+ 7.Kf2 Rf4+ 8.Kg2 Bf5
9.Ng3 Bxg6 10.Ra1 a5 11.Bxg6 Kxg6
12.Ba3 Bxa3 13.Rxa3 d3 14.cxd3 Rd4
15.Rxa5 Rxd3 (77.192.138.428) 1840

53 698:51 +0.66 2...Bg4+ {30...Bg4+ is what was played in PV leading to the first diagram and so could even lead to a lost position for Black}
3.Ke1 Bc7 4.Kf2 Bb6 5.Re1 e4
6.Be2 Bxe2 7.Kxe2 Kxg6 8.Rd1 Rc8
9.Bxd4 Rxc2+ 10.Ke3 Rc3+ 11.Kf2 Rc2+
12.Kg3 Bxd4 13.Rxd4 Rxa2 14.Ne3 Kf6
15.Rxd5 Rb2 (77.192.138.428) 1840

53 698:51 +0.72 2...Kg7 3.Kd2 Bc5 4.a3 a5 5.axb4 Bxb4+
6.c3 dxc3+ 7.Bxc3 Bxc3+ 8.Kxc3 Rh3
9.Kc2 e4 10.Be2 Be6 11.Rxa5 d4
12.Bc4 Bxc4 13.bxc4 Kxg6 14.Kd2 Rf3
15.Ke1 Rc3 (77.192.138.428) 1840

53 698:51 +0.80 2...Bd7 3.Kd2 Rh3 4.a4 Bg4 5.Re1 a5
6.Be2 Bf5 7.Kc1 Bxg6 8.Nd2 Rg3 9.Bb5 Bc5
10.Rf1+ Ke6 11.Nf3 Bh5 12.Nh4 Rh3
13.Nf5 Bf3 14.Ba6 Rh1 15.Rxh1 Bxh1 (77.192.138.428) 1840
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first
place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you
are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan

User avatar
Eelco de Groot
Posts: 4131
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 1:40 am
Location: Groningen

Re: Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by Eelco de Groot » Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:45 am

Off topic, is Diemer the one from the Blackmar-Diemer gambit?

Nice picture of two other chess players, a very young Jan Timman and almost just as young Boris Spasski, 10 october 1977 at Elsevier publishing company. I don't remember this particular match, I do remember an earlier match after Korchnoi had defected to 'The West' and stayed a while here in Holland, Jan played a match against Korchnoi in 1976. Korchnoi won.

Image
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first
place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you
are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
-- Brian W. Kernighan

Zenmastur
Posts: 389
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 6:28 am

Re: Diemer vs Trommsdorf 1973

Post by Zenmastur » Mon Aug 05, 2019 6:40 am

Look wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:58 am
Hi,

Just one position from one of the craziest games I've ever seen:



What would go on after 19.Nbd2 rather than 19.Nh4

The game that deserves much attention:

Black is busted after ( [Stockfish 260719 64 BMI2] 47:+2.37 18.Nd2 d3 19.Ndf3 dxc2 20.Qh3 Nc6 21.Bxc2 Ncxe5 22.fxe5 Qxh3 23.Nxh3 Nxe5 24.Nxe5 Bxe5 25.Nf2 Rh8 26.Bd3 Bxd3 27.Nxd3 Rh1+ 28.Ke2 Rh2+ 29.Kf1 Bd6 30.Be3 Rh1+ 31.Bg1 e5 32.Ke2 Rh5 33.Bxa7 e4 34.Nf2 Rxg5 35.Be3 Rg6 36.Bd4 Ke6 37.Rc1 Rg5 38.Rc8 Rg2 39.Rh8 Kd7 40.Rh6 Rg3 41.Rh4 Rg2 42.Kf1 Rg5 43.Rg4 Rf5 or h5 ) as the position is a win for white after a long endgame grind.


I think 15. … cxd4? is a mistake. e.g.

16.f4 ( [Stockfish 260719 64 BMI2] 45:+1.21 16...Nc6 17.Nd2 Ba6 18.Ndf3 Qh8 19.Bd3 Bxd3 20.Qxd3 a6 21.Bd2 Nc5 22.Qf1 Rc8 23.Qh3 Kd7 24.a3 b3 25.Qxh8 Rxh8 26.Bb4 Ne4 27.cxb3 d3 28.Bd2 Ne7 29.O-O-O Rc8+ 30.Kb1 Nxd2+ 31.Rxd2 Rf8 32.Nh3 Ng6 33.Rxd3 Nxf4 34.Nxf4 Rxf4 35.b4 Rg4 36.Kc2 Bf8 37.Kb3 Be7 38.Ka4 Bd8 39.Rd4 Rg2 40.Rh4 Bxg5 41.Rh7+ Be7 42.Nd4 Rxb2 43.Rh6 Ra2 44.Nxe6 Re2 45.Nf4 Bg5 46.Nxe2 Bxh6 47.Ka5 ) and black has the worst of it.

Better is: ( [Stockfish 260719 64 BMI2] 40:+0.01 15...Nc6 16.a3 Qa5 17.f4 Ba6 18.Nd2 Nxd4 19.Ndf3 Nxf3+ 20.Nxf3 Rh8 21.f5 Rxh7 22.f6+ Kf8 23.Kf2 b3 24.g6 Rh5 25.fxg7+ Kg8 26.Nd4 Rh2+ 27.Kg3 cxd4 28.Kxh2 Qc7 29.Qxd4 bxc2 30.Kg3 Qxe5+ 31.Qxe5 Nxe5 32.Kf4 Nd3+ 33.Kg5 d4 34.Kf6 Nf2 35.Kxe6 Kxg7 36.Ke5 d3 37.Kf5 Bb7 38.Kf4 Nd1 39.a4 Kxg6 40.Ra3 Ba6 41.Rb3 )

Regards,

Zenmastur
Only 2 defining forces have ever offered to die for you.....Jesus Christ and the American Soldier. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Post Reply