He probably had to get off of the computer. Only logical explanation
Why did black resign?
Sort:
Many thanks for the replies and input! To sum up the opinions, the game does look even, with the prospect of a long pawn battle to a draw, possible white win. Resignation remains something of a mystery, but prob. not based on purely chess reasons.
(Should have made it clear in the OP, but it was an online game (5 days/turn), so distractions such as dogs spewing/phone calls etc shouldn't have been a factor (unless it was a particularly epic dog spew, I suppose).)
That would have to be pretty epic to cause him to resign a 5 day/turn game - perhaps it made him reevaluate his life and he decided he didn't need no more of this darn chess crap.
Blackfang wrote:
It was a purely psychological resignation - after plugging it into my engine, Black actually has a .1-.2 pawn advantage (Crafty, 25 ply). After 13. Nxe4 14. Re1, 14...f5 protects the knight. Continuation was as follows:
15. f3 c5 16. fxe4 O-O-O 17. exf5 cxb4 18. d3 bxa3 19. Re4 Kc7.
This was done with Crafty on a five minute time control for the rest of the moves (after move 13), with the evaluation reading about equal.
So I disagree with mauricilopezsr - the position is by no means lost through exact play. In fact, Crafty (against itself) agreed to draw after 84 moves (including the 13 played in the game). 5 minutes per 40 moves.
Here's the PGN, in case you were interested:
Apparently, I royally screwed up this PGN. I've taken it down. Anyway, Crafty drew, that's what my point was.
You Believe your engine to be "God" I don't; for starters I would NOT play F3 but D3; this will open the file to attack the weak D5 pawn with the rooks! As I said not a lost position and only lost against accurate play; F3 is NOT accurate, hence the draw!
mauriciolopezsr wrote:
Blackfang wrote:
It was a purely psychological resignation - after plugging it into my engine, Black actually has a .1-.2 pawn advantage (Crafty, 25 ply). After 13. Nxe4 14. Re1, 14...f5 protects the knight. Continuation was as follows:
15. f3 c5 16. fxe4 O-O-O 17. exf5 cxb4 18. d3 bxa3 19. Re4 Kc7.
This was done with Crafty on a five minute time control for the rest of the moves (after move 13), with the evaluation reading about equal.
So I disagree with mauricilopezsr - the position is by no means lost through exact play. In fact, Crafty (against itself) agreed to draw after 84 moves (including the 13 played in the game). 5 minutes per 40 moves.
Here's the PGN, in case you were interested:
Apparently, I royally screwed up this PGN. I've taken it down. Anyway, Crafty drew, that's what my point was.
You Believe your engine to be "God" I don't; for starters I would NOT play F3 but D3; this will open the file to attack the weak D5 pawn with the rooks! As I said not a lost position and only lost against accurate play; F3 is NOT accurate, hence the draw!
Alright, let's go. I'll set up the starting position that's exactly the same as the one in the first post, we'll do 3 days per move, and I'll let my engine decide how to play - you'll play on your own. We'll see who knows the game better once you lose.
Garry Kasparov lost to Deep Blue - back in 1997. 15 years ago. I have enough computing power in my $450 desktop at home to put up a strong fight against even the highest rated players.
Blackfang wrote:
mauriciolopezsr wrote:
Blackfang wrote:
It was a purely psychological resignation - after plugging it into my engine, Black actually has a .1-.2 pawn advantage (Crafty, 25 ply). After 13. Nxe4 14. Re1, 14...f5 protects the knight. Continuation was as follows:
15. f3 c5 16. fxe4 O-O-O 17. exf5 cxb4 18. d3 bxa3 19. Re4 Kc7.
This was done with Crafty on a five minute time control for the rest of the moves (after move 13), with the evaluation reading about equal.
So I disagree with mauricilopezsr - the position is by no means lost through exact play. In fact, Crafty (against itself) agreed to draw after 84 moves (including the 13 played in the game). 5 minutes per 40 moves.
Here's the PGN, in case you were interested:
Apparently, I royally screwed up this PGN. I've taken it down. Anyway, Crafty drew, that's what my point was.
You Believe your engine to be "God" I don't; for starters I would NOT play F3 but D3; this will open the file to attack the weak D5 pawn with the rooks! As I said not a lost position and only lost against accurate play; F3 is NOT accurate, hence the draw!
Alright, let's go. I'll set up the starting position that's exactly the same as the one in the first post, we'll do 3 days per move, and I'll let my engine decide how to play - you'll play on your own. We'll see who knows the game better once you lose.
Garry Kasparov lost to Deep Blue - back in 1997. 15 years ago. I have enough computing power in my $450 desktop at home to put up a strong fight against even the highest rated players.
I am NOT about to engage in a Polemic with you or a pissing match to demonstrate that your Computer is better than me or Kasparov.
You tergiversated my statements and I just clarify, that is it! enjoy your $450.00 piece of hardware! I play chess for fun and winning a game with the help of a computer program is NOT my idea of fun, actually it sound more like cheating to me!
Chess is the duel of two minds, Computers are NOT minds, but rather some computational monsters designed to out perform the human mind; with parallel computers, the computers can actually perform calculations faster that the speed of light! this is a barrier that no human can surpass.
Rofl, no it can't. There is currently no known way to exceed the speed of light. Also, my quad core CPU (which I don't mainly use for chess, by the way - I have it because I need it for other things) is technically an example of parallel computing - and (unfortunately) I guarantee you, I am not calculating faster than the speed of light.
While I don't believe my engine is god (who would do that? God doesn't exist!), I do believe in it's ability to play to a far higher level than many, many players. Chess is not the duel of two minds - it's about two opposing armies. We just happen to have minds controlling those armies.
Blackfang wrote:
Wrong again; by performing computations in parallel the computer actually works faster than the speed of light! something the human mind can NOT do!
Rofl, no it can't. There is currently no known way to exceed the speed of light. Also, my quad core CPU (which I don't mainly use for chess, by the way - I have it because I need it for other things) is technically an example of parallel computing - and (unfortunately) I guarantee you, I am not calculating faster than the speed of light.
While I don't believe my engine is god (who would do that? God doesn't exist!), I do believe in it's ability to play to a far higher level than many, many players. Chess is not the duel of two minds - it's about two opposing armies. We just happen to have minds controlling those armies.
sorry You turn out to be an Atheist; ther could be no worst thing that could happen to a man.
You're a total idiot, and I sincerely hope, for the good of mankind, that you're trolling.
Blackfang wrote:
You're a total idiot, and I sincerely hope, for the good of mankind, that you're trolling.
As you please Atheist, as you please! I am a Christian and do feel sorry for Atheists that will end up in hell!
mauriciolopezsr if you make one more degradatory comment about religion (no matter if it's to Muslims, Atheists, Jews, whatnot) i will personally file a complaint to kohai about your supremely obnoxious behavior. show me proof that I will go to hell just because i am an atheist. WHERE IS THE PROOF?!
levi223 wrote:
mauriciolopezsr if you make one more degradatory comment about religion (no matter if it's to Muslims, Atheists, Jews, whatnot) i will personally file a complaint to kohai about your supremely obnoxious behavior. show me proof that I will go to hell just because i am an atheist. WHERE IS THE PROOF?!
Don't make him get out his book, levi. Be careful of that book. I've heard things about that book...
Anthony: Not to say that all religious people are mean, but he's being very outspoken about it - what do you think? All the reasonable religious people I know are quiet about their religious affiliation, and certainly wouldn't rise to the bait like that.
mauriciolopezsr wrote:
the computers can actually perform calculations faster that the speed of light! this is a barrier that no human can surpass.
Speed of light is measured in m/s (or, more generally, length/time). Computing power is measured in instructions / second. To my knowledge, there is no conversion between length and instruction, so this statement appears to make no sense.
Happy to be corrected, though.
ixix wrote:
mauriciolopezsr wrote:
the computers can actually perform calculations faster that the speed of light! this is a barrier that no human can surpass.
Speed of light is measured in m/s (or, more generally, length/time). Computing power is measured in instructions / second. To my knowledge, there is no conversion between length and instruction, so this statement appears to make no sense.
Happy to be corrected, though.
nice lol
Blackfang wrote:
eddysallin wrote:
taking the b. gets re1(pinning the n.)pf5 will get pf3 winning the n.
15. f3 c5 16. fxe4 O-O-O 17. exf5 cxb4 18. d3 bxa3 19. Re4 Kc7.
You lose the knight, correct, but that's not a problem - you were already up a piece.
true,thats the point! Why resign? Fairly even....so the game position should "not" be a reason to give up.
Well. This has been educational: I learned a new word (tergiversate) and witnessed an atheist being damned to hell. Not a bad day at the office.
As for the chess-related part of our program, only Black can explain why he resigned when he did. After 13. ... NxB, 14. Re1 0-0-0 Black is at least equal, though with opposite-color Bs the games is likely drawn.
levi223 wrote:
From under which rock did this guy crawl from?! I was NOT talking to you; If you are Atheist and feel offended, well that is your problem.
mauriciolopezsr if you make one more degradatory comment about religion (no matter if it's to Muslims, Atheists, Jews, whatnot) i will personally file a complaint to kohai about your supremely obnoxious behavior. show me proof that I will go to hell just because i am an atheist. WHERE IS THE PROOF?!
levi223 wrote:
From under which rock did this guy crawl from?! I was NOT talking to you; If you are Atheist and feel offended, well that is your problem.
mauriciolopezsr if you make one more degradatory comment about religion (no matter if it's to Muslims, Atheists, Jews, whatnot) i will personally file a complaint to kohai about your supremely obnoxious behavior. show me proof that I will go to hell just because i am an atheist. WHERE IS THE PROOF?!
Compassion does exist in Christianity, Christianilty is a fundamentally compasionate religion!
levi223 wrote:
From under which rock did this guy crawl from?! I was NOT talking to you; If you are Atheist and feel offended, well that is your problem.
mauriciolopezsr if you make one more degradatory comment about religion (no matter if it's to Muslims, Atheists, Jews, whatnot) i will personally file a complaint to kohai about your supremely obnoxious behavior. show me proof that I will go to hell just because i am an atheist. WHERE IS THE PROOF?!
Compassion does exist in Christianity, Christianilty is a fundamentally compasionate religion!
taking the b. gets re1(pinning the n.)pf5 will get pf3 winning the n.
15. f3 c5 16. fxe4 O-O-O 17. exf5 cxb4 18. d3 bxa3 19. Re4 Kc7.
You lose the knight, correct, but that's not a problem - you were already up a piece.