PDA

View Full Version : KB vs Stockfish (sf A.R.B Chess System)



Kevin Bonham
21-01-2014, 11:36 PM
So the Most Important thing is that we Both can See it Beats Chess Computers! Rated (3000) + ELO Where as Humans Playing the Normal way Can't Win!! :)

I'm still curious about what the success rate is - in what percentage of games do you win?

I should get one of these new "3000+" programs to try my own computer beating method out on one of these days. It certainly sometimes (1 in 50?) beats slightly older computers that I will only otherwise ever beat by playing the Spanish Four Knights and swapping into pawn endings.

TheARBChessSys
22-01-2014, 12:46 AM
I'm still curious about what the success rate is - in what percentage of games do you win?

I should get one of these new "3000+" programs to try my own computer beating method out on one of these days. It certainly sometimes (1 in 50?) beats slightly older computers that I will only otherwise ever beat by playing the Spanish Four Knights and swapping into pawn endings.


It's a High Win Percentage.... :)

Go get the Best Free 3000+ ELO Program! Only just 2nd to Houdini...But Stockfish Soon to be No.1 :)

http://stockfishchess.org/download/

http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/rating_list_all.html


Stockfish (5 +) (2014 +) No.1 And It's Free! :) The A.R.B Chess System Knows! :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev6UwoQvmIc

Stockfish No.1 It's Senseless to Buy a Chess Program!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUA-pGc-Y8s


& Best Free Arena 3.5 GUI

http://www.playwitharena.com/


A.R.B

Kevin Bonham
22-01-2014, 02:08 AM
Thanks very much for the Stockfish link. It was actually very easy to install on my existing Fritz GUI. Running some testing to see how strongly it plays on my system before I take it on personally!

TheARBChessSys
22-01-2014, 11:01 PM
Thanks very much for the Stockfish link. It was actually very easy to install on my existing Fritz GUI. Running some testing to see how strongly it plays on my system before I take it on personally!

Cool! :)

If you have Never seen the latest (3000) + ELO Chess programs in Action! then you are in for a Shock!! just watch it Demolish Fritz Etc.

The New Programs really do Play in an Un-Human like way! I have seen some Moves I Never thought Possible! :)


A.R.B

Kevin Bonham
23-01-2014, 12:09 AM
If you have Never seen the latest (3000) + ELO Chess programs in Action! then you are in for a Shock!! just watch it Demolish Fritz Etc.

Yes my copy of Fritz is about five years old. I set up a 10-game blitz match and Stockfish won +8=2-0. The endgames were like watching Carlsen beat a 2500.

However I might need to find a better opening book for it than the Fritz one or change some setting because it let me get away with this:

Stockfish - Bonham

1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.c4 Be7 5.d4 0-0 6.0-0 dxc4 7.Qc2 a6 8.Qxc4 b5 9.Qc2 Bb7 10.Bd2 Be4 11.Qc1 Bb7 12.Qc2 Be4 13.Qc1 Bb7 14.Qc2 -

TheARBChessSys
23-01-2014, 01:12 AM
Cool! :)

If you have Never seen the latest (3000) + ELO Chess programs in Action! then you are in for a Shock!! just watch it Demolish Fritz Etc.

The New Programs really do Play in an Un-Human like way! I have seen some Moves I Never thought Possible! :)

Yes my copy of Fritz is about five years old. I set up a 10-game blitz match and Stockfish won +8=2-0. The endgames were like watching Carlsen beat a 2500.

However I might need to find a better opening book for it than the Fritz one or change some setting because it let me get away with this:

Stockfish - Bonham ??


A.R.B


Very Funny! :) You must have the Settings on (Old Geezer Mode!)

2481


And must be Time to Get Rid of that Old Comp! :)


2482



A.R.B

Kevin Bonham
23-01-2014, 01:30 AM
:lol:

I do often keep computers for a long time (5-6 years) but my current one is not much over 1 year old.

It's actually a result of it using the Fritz opening book, which must have been used when Fritz beat me in the same line before and hence was weighted in favour of that line. Because 11.Qc1 and 13.Qc1 are the only book moves in the position, the opening book has to suffer a few times before it downweights the moves that lead into it and thus learns not to get into that position. After allowing me to repeat the same draw another two times, 8.a4 was played instead.

TheARBChessSys
23-01-2014, 09:09 PM
:lol:

I do often keep computers for a long time (5-6 years) but my current one is not much over 1 year old.

It's actually a result of it using the Fritz opening book, which must have been used when Fritz beat me in the same line before and hence was weighted in favour of that line. Because 11.Qc1 and 13.Qc1 are the only book moves in the position, the opening book has to suffer a few times before it downweights the moves that lead into it and thus learns not to get into that position. After allowing me to repeat the same draw another two times, 8.a4 was played instead.


Always Best! to turn the Opening Books off! just in case some Stupid Human has input an Illogical Opening line!

Not only that!...

When Computer Chess Programs have Opening Books!

And End Game Data Bases (30) Moves Deep!...

Put in By Humans? All Variations!

Then the Middle Game will Disappear!

The Computer will Not! Have to Think? or Calculate!

Just... link the Start! with the End!


A.R.B

Kevin Bonham
23-01-2014, 09:12 PM
Score update: Stockfish-KB +31=3-0.

Agent Smith
01-02-2014, 09:20 PM
and then... ?

I guess one could consider the ELO diff between SF and KB and predict a win for KB sometime, but i'm not sure
how releveant ELO is to something as reliable as a computer.

Kevin Bonham
01-02-2014, 09:27 PM
Just managed to get it to an apparently drawn ending, which I stuffed up. Getting there. :lol:

I suspect by playing against it by completely normal means I probably wouldn't beat it before the heat death of the universe. But there is a plan ...

Agent Smith
12-02-2014, 07:13 AM
You're a bit of a masochist me thinks :)

I think the A.R.B thread (and also the chess engine video threads) must be about generating youtube hits for their modest advertising revenue kick-backs ???

Kevin Bonham
12-02-2014, 09:42 AM
I haven't had any more time for this project lately; it's probably up to about +55 now. However more attempts will be made as spare time arises.

Capablanca-Fan
19-02-2014, 05:40 AM
Yes my copy of Fritz is about five years old. I set up a 10-game blitz match and Stockfish won +8=2-0. The endgames were like watching Carlsen beat a 2500.

These days it's probably like watching Carlsen beat a 2750.

Kevin Bonham
27-04-2014, 05:32 PM
Score update: Stockfish +113=13-0.

The draw percentage flatters me because of a number of repeats of this draw with me white:

1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.g3 e6 4.c4 Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 dxc4 7.Qc2 a6 8.a4 Bd7 9.Qxc4 Bc6 10.Bg5 Bd5 11.Qc2 Be4 12.Qd1 c5 13.dxc5 Bxc5 14.Qxd8 Rxd8 15.Nbd2 Bc6 16.Nb3 Be7 17.Na5 h6 18.Be3 Nd5 19.Bd4 Bb4 20.Nc4 Nd7 21.Rfc1 Ne7 22.Nb6 Nxb6 23.Bxb6 Rd6 24.Bc7 Bonham doubles 24...Rd7 25.Bb6 Rd6 26.Bc7 Rd7 27.Bb6 -

Adamski
27-04-2014, 05:46 PM
Shouldn't a top program learn from what's gone before and avoid repeating a drawing line?

Kevin Bonham
27-04-2014, 05:57 PM
Shouldn't a top program learn from what's gone before and avoid repeating a drawing line?

Ideally yes, but since I'm just using it as a drop-in with Fritz, the Fritz opening book goes out of book after 17.Na5. But it is only after 21...Ne7 that the draw always happens and because of the high degree of randomisation of moves, that position doesn't come up very often from the position after 17.Na5. So it seems like it isn't learning to not play 21...Ne7.

I might try switching the opening book off and seeing what happens!

Compared to my old Fritz it really is disturbingly strong. Even in symmetrical and positional games like in the line above it's difficult for me to make even 8-10 moves in a level position and not start losing.

Capablanca-Fan
02-05-2014, 05:37 AM
Compared to my old Fritz it really is disturbingly strong. Even in symmetrical and positional games like in the line above it's difficult for me to make even 8-10 moves in a level position and not start losing.
Could there not be some sort of "contempt" factor built in, where it declines draws unless it is disadvantaged by say -0.9 (i.e. plays on unless a clear pawn or more down)?

Kevin Bonham
02-05-2014, 11:01 AM
Could there not be some sort of "contempt" factor built in, where it declines draws unless it is disadvantaged by say -0.9 (i.e. plays on unless a clear pawn or more down)?

That can be applied for casual games but for rated games it seems it has pre-applied settings for whether it allows a draw or not. I'm unsure whether they take into account what the computer has on file about the opponent's rating.

Desmond
01-04-2015, 06:17 AM
What does "Fritz 11 doubles" mean?

Kevin Bonham
01-04-2015, 11:12 AM
What does "Fritz 11 doubles" mean?

I actually tried (unsuccessfully) to delete those three posts last night when I discovered that the draws and in some cases missed wins I had had just in the last week were in fact attributable to poor old Fritz 11 having been loaded as the blitz engine instead of Stockfish! (They are now deleted). However, whatever engine is loaded there is a notional "money supply" where you can "bet" on games against the computer, and it works the same way as backgammon - either side can offer to double and the other side can either resign (losing the present stake) or play on (doubling the stake for both sides). Having doubled you can't redouble until the opponent doubles.

Desmond
01-04-2015, 06:58 PM
I actually tried (unsuccessfully) to delete those three posts last night when I discovered that the draws and in some cases missed wins I had had just in the last week were in fact attributable to poor old Fritz 11 having been loaded as the blitz engine instead of Stockfish! (They are now deleted). However, whatever engine is loaded there is a notional "money supply" where you can "bet" on games against the computer, and it works the same way as backgammon - either side can offer to double and the other side can either resign (losing the present stake) or play on (doubling the stake for both sides). Having doubled you can't redouble until the opponent doubles.Ah ok thanks, I had no idea you could do that. I though it meant double rooks or pawns or something. :)

Kevin Bonham
02-07-2015, 11:32 PM
At the 410th attempt, this is my second genuine draw (as opposed to theory-type repetitions or repeats of previous draws) against the beast. (And yes this time it is really Stockfish and I haven't gone back to Fritz by mistake). In this game I thought I was going to be brilliantly defeated but it turned out it had nothing. :lol:

Bonham - Stockfish:

1.h3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Bb5 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.d3 h6 8.a3 Bxc3 9.bxc3 a6 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Be3 Rb8 12.Rb1 Be6 13.c4 Nd7 14.Rxb8 Qxb8 15.Qb1 f5 16.exf5 Bxf5 17.Qb4 c5 18.Qa4 Nb6 19.Qxa6 Bc8 20.Qb5 Rxf3 21.gxf3 Bd7 22.Qb1 Qe8 23.Kh2 Qh5 24.Rh1 Qxh3+ 25.Kg1 Qxf3 26.Qf1 Kh8 27.Qg2 Qd1+ 28.Kh2 Qh5+ 29.Kg1 Qd1+ 30.Kh2 Qh5+ 31.Kg1 Qd1+ -

Agent Smith
03-07-2015, 06:52 AM
I think the correct thread should be "In yer dreams ..." :)
Why didn't it play 19.... Bxh3 ? What time control are you using.

Kevin Bonham
03-07-2015, 09:51 AM
I think the correct thread should be "In yer dreams ..." :)
Why didn't it play 19.... Bxh3 ? What time control are you using.

4/2 as noted in the poll. I had a number of near-wins last night as well. It isn't actually the latest Stockfish version, just the one that was current at the time I started the test; when I beat it I'll upgrade it to the latest version. :lol: If I leave it running it takes it about 20 seconds to see that 19...Bxh3 is best.

TheARBChessSys
03-07-2015, 04:47 PM
At the 410th attempt, this is my second genuine draw (as opposed to theory-type repetitions or repeats of previous draws) against the beast. (And yes this time it is really Stockfish and I haven't gone back to Fritz by mistake). In this game I thought I was going to be brilliantly defeated but it turned out it had nothing. :lol:

Bonham - Stockfish:

1.h3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Bb5 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.d3 h6 8.a3 Bxc3 9.bxc3 a6 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.Be3 Rb8 12.Rb1 Be6 13.c4 Nd7 14.Rxb8 Qxb8 15.Qb1 f5 16.exf5 Bxf5 17.Qb4 c5 18.Qa4 Nb6 19.Qxa6 Bc8 20.Qb5 Rxf3 21.gxf3 Bd7 22.Qb1 Qe8 23.Kh2 Qh5 24.Rh1 Qxh3+ 25.Kg1 Qxf3 26.Qf1 Kh8 27.Qg2 Qd1+ 28.Kh2 Qh5+ 29.Kg1 Qd1+ 30.Kh2 Qh5+ 31.Kg1 Qd1+ -


Looking Good Kevin :)

Kevin Bonham
30-07-2015, 12:11 AM
A terrible disaster has affected my attempts to beat the beast on my system. I had discovered that it was especially susceptible as black in the following Rossolimo line:

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 g6 4.0-0 Bg7 5.c3 Nf6 6.Re1 0-0 7.d4 cxd4 8.cxd4 d5 9.e5 Ne4 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Bg4 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 Qa5 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.a4

...and had played a large number of games against it in this line, frequently getting won positions but never being quite able to put them away (they were often something like, say, +2.5 in a messy queen ending). All I had to show for it was a bunch of draws. Tonight when I opened Fritz, which I am using as a shell for Stockfish, there was an engine load error and as a result I "won" a game on time. Unfortunately this has resulted in the opening book learning function learning not to play the Sicilian and I am now kicked back down to the bottom of the mountain with its preference switching to 1...e5. (edit: disabused it of that quick smart but now it's playing 1...c5 2...d6).

On the basis of those near-wins I did vote that I would beat Stockfish in the poll but I now suspect knocking it over within the remaining months will be too hard.

Kevin Bonham
21-08-2015, 11:22 PM
Or not!

I was actually slightly overcounting the number of serious attempts I had made before because the auto-save function was double-counting some games.

However after 561 attempts (437 white, 124 black - games resigned within 10 moves not counted) I've finally beaten the copy of Stockfish I installed at the start of last year. My target was to beat it within two years and it has actually taken me exactly 19 months. 34 of the 561 games were draws (several of those more or less repeats of the same line) and I could have drawn more but quite often resigned drawn positions if I had no chance of winning them.

Of course it's not "pure Stockfish" that I've beaten - it's Stockfish playing inside the shell of an old Fritz, which means some limitations in terms of book and the learning function. Probably better though than if it has to play without a learning function and book at all.

Bonham,Kevin (2150) - Stockfish DD 64 SSE4.2 (2794) [B51]
Blitz:4'+2", 21.08.2015

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Nc6 4.Bxc6+ bxc6 5.0-0 Bg4 6.d3 Nf6 7.c3 Nd7 8.Be3 Qb8 9.Nbd2 Qxb2 10.d4 cxd4 11.cxd4 g6 12.Qa4 Qb5 13.Qa3 d5? [In my view this move, played after fourteen seconds, is so bad as to be probably losing. 13...Nb6 is the book move but it had learned not to play it after numerous draws in the following line: 14.Rfc1 Bg7 15.Rab1 Qa4 16.Qxa4 Nxa4 17.Rxc6 Kd7 18.Ra6 Nb6 19.h3 Bxf3 20.Nxf3 Rhc8 21.d5 f5 22.Rb5 fxe4 23.Nd2 and now for instance it could find nothing better than drawing after 23...Rc1+ 24.Nf1 Rcc8 25.Nd2 Rc1+ 26.Nf1 Rcc8 27.Nd2 - ] 14.Rfb1 e6 15.Qc3 Qa4 16.Rb7 f6 17.h3 Bxf3 18.Nxf3 Bd6 19.e5 Rb8 20.Rab1 Rxb7 21.Rxb7 Qa6 22.Qb3 Nb6 23.Rg7 fxe5 24.Nxe5 Qb5 25.Rxa7 Qxb3 26.axb3 Nc8 27.Rb7 0-0 28.Bh6 Bxe5 29.Bxf8 Bxd4 30.Rb8 Kxf8 31.Rxc8+ Ke7 32.Rxc6 Kd7 33.Ra6 Bc5 34.Kf1 Ke7 35.Ra4 Bb6 36.Ra8 Bc5 37.Ke2 e5 38.Ra5 Kd6 39.Rb5 e4 40.b4 Bd4 41.Rb7 h5 42.b5 Kc5 43.Rb8 Be5 44.Rg8 Kxb5 45.Rxg6 Bc7 46.Rg5 Kc4 47.Rxh5 d4 48.Rh7 Bb6 49.Rf7 Bd8 50.g3 Bb6 51.h4 d3+ 52.Kd1 Kd5 53.h5 e3 54.fxe3 1-0

Desmond
23-08-2015, 05:28 PM
Congratulations Kevin!

TheARBChessSys
07-09-2015, 10:05 PM
Well done Kevin :)

I tried to download your game and all I got was...

[Event "Unkown"]
[Site "Unkown"]
[Date "Unkown"]
[Round "Unkown"]
[White "Unkown"]
[Black "Unkown"]
[Result "Unkown"]
[SetUp "0"]



If you can upload your game to http://en.lichess.org/paste

The site will Analyse it for you :)

Kevin Bonham
07-09-2015, 11:28 PM
The Download function might not still be working.

TheARBChessSys
08-09-2015, 07:30 PM
OK! Can you upload your game to the site I provided ? it would be interesting to see the Analysis of your game :)

Kevin Bonham
08-09-2015, 08:10 PM
OK! Can you upload your game to the site I provided ? it would be interesting to see the Analysis of your game :)

http://en.lichess.org/r23XoJRW#94

Interesting site.

Kevin Bonham
08-09-2015, 09:09 PM
I should note I had the benefit of numerous tries against Stockfish in the same line to improve my play. Thought I'd put what I consider to be my best rated OTB game through that site for a comparison:

http://en.lichess.org/h0hIBiYd

TheARBChessSys
08-09-2015, 09:42 PM
Great stuff Kevin Nice games :) glad you like the Analysis site you can download your games from the site plus .pdf files which are quite nice!

Below are your 2 Games.

[Event "Import"]
[Site "http://lichess.org/h0hIBiYd"]
[Date "2015.09.08"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[Variant "Standard"]
[TimeControl "-"]
[ECO "B30"]
[Opening "Sicilian Defence, Nyezhmetdinov-Rossolimo Attack"]
[Termination "Normal"]
[Annotator "lichess.org"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 { Sicilian Defence, Nyezhmetdinov-Rossolimo Attack } e6 4. O-O Nge7 5. d4 Nxd4 6. Nxd4 cxd4 7. Qxd4 a6 8. Be2 Nc6 9. Qc3 Qf6 10. Qg3 Be7 11. c3 O-O 12. Na3 b5 13. Nc2 d6 14. Be3 Bb7 15. Rad1 Rac8 16. f4 e5 17. fxe5 Qxe5 18. Bf4 Qc5+ 19. Kh1 Ne5 20. Be3 Qc7 21. Bf3 f5? { (0.00 → 1.06) Mistake. The best move was Bf6. } (21... Bf6 22. Bd4 Rce8 23. Ne3 Qd8 24. Nf5 Re6 25. Be3 Kh8 26. Nd4 Re7 27. Nf5 Re6) 22. Nd4 fxe4? { (0.80 → 1.91) Mistake. The best move was Bf6. } (22... Bf6 23. Nxf5 Rcd8 24. Bd4 Bc6 25. Kg1 a5 26. Qf2 Rb8 27. Ba7 Nxf3+ 28. gxf3 Rb7 29. Be3 Be5 30. Qg2 b4 31. cxb4 Rxb4) 23. Ne6 Bh4 24. Qxh4 exf3 25. Nxc7 fxg2+ 26. Kg1 gxf1=Q+ 27. Rxf1 Nf3+ 28. Rxf3 Rxf3 29. Ne6 Re8? { (2.37 → 5.33) Mistake. The best move was Rf6. } (29... Rf6 30. Qg4 Rg6 31. Bg5 Re8 32. Nf4 Re4 33. Qg3 Rxf4 34. Qxf4 h6 35. h4 hxg5 36. Qf5 Rf6 37. Qd7 Bd5 38. hxg5 Rg6 39. Qf5) 30. Ng5 Rfxe3 31. Qxh7+ Kf8 32. Qh8+ Ke7 33. Qxg7+ Kd8 34. Qxb7 Re1+ 35. Kf2 R8e2+ 36. Kf3 Rd2 37. Qc6?! { (6.07 → 5.44) Inaccuracy. The best move was Qxa6. } (37. Qxa6 Rf1+ 38. Ke3 Rxb2 39. Qxd6+ Ke8 40. Qc6+ Ke7 41. h4 Rbb1 42. Qc7+ Kf8 43. Kd4 Rbe1 44. Kc5 Re2 45. Qd8+ Kg7 46. Qd7+ Kg8) 37... Rdd1? { (5.44 → 6.77) Mistake. The best move was Red1. } (37... Red1 38. h4 Rxb2 39. Qxa6 Kc7 40. Qa7+ Kc6 41. Ne6 Kd5 42. Nf4+ Kc6 43. Qa6+ Kc7 44. h5 Rh1 45. Ke4 Kd7 46. Kf5 Rhh2 47. Qb7+) 38. Nf7+?! { (6.77 → 5.99) Inaccuracy. The best move was Qxa6. } (38. Qxa6 b4 39. Qb6+ Kc8 40. cxb4 Rf1+ 41. Kg4 Rg1+ 42. Kh5 Rh1 43. Nf3 Kd7 44. b5 Rb1 45. Qc6+ Ke7 46. Qc7+ Ke6) 38... Ke7 39. Qc7+ Ke6? { (6.30 → 8.41) Mistake. The best move was Kf6. } (39... Kf6 40. Nxd6 Rf1+ 41. Kg4 Rde1 42. Qc6 Rg1+ 43. Kh4 Rgf1 44. Qxa6 Re2 45. Kg4 Rg1+ 46. Kf3 Rge1 47. Ne4+ Kf7) 40. Nd8+ Kd5? { (8.23 → Mate in 5) Checkmate is now unavoidable. The best move was Kf6. } (40... Kf6 41. Qf7+ Kg5 42. Ne6+ Rxe6 43. Qxe6 Rf1+ 44. Kg3 Rg1+ 45. Kf2 Rg4 46. Qd5+ Kh6 47. Qxd6+ Rg6 48. Qe5 Rg4 49. Qf6+ Rg6 50. Qh8+) 41. Qf7+ Kc5 42. b4+ { Black resigns } 1-0


[Event "Import"]
[Site "http://lichess.org/r23XoJRW"]
[Date "2015.09.08"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "107"]
[Variant "Standard"]
[TimeControl "-"]
[ECO "B51"]
[Opening "Sicilian Defence, Canal Attack"]
[Termination "Normal"]
[Annotator "lichess.org"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ { Sicilian Defence, Canal Attack } Nc6 4. Bxc6+ bxc6 5. O-O Bg4?! { (-0.11 → 0.39) Inaccuracy. The best move was e5. } (5... e5 6. d3 Be7 7. Re1 f5 8. Nbd2 Nf6 9. Nc4 fxe4 10. dxe4 O-O 11. b3 Rb8 12. Bb2 Be6 13. Qd3 Rb4 14. Bc3 Bxc4 15. bxc4) 6. d3 Nf6 7. c3 Nd7 8. Be3 Qb8 9. Nbd2 Qxb2 10. d4 cxd4 11. cxd4 g6 12. Qa4 Qb5 13. Qa3 d5 14. Rfb1 e6 15. Qc3 Qa4 16. Rb7 f6 17. h3 Bxf3 18. Nxf3 Bd6 19. e5 Rb8 20. Rab1 Rxb7 21. Rxb7 Qa6 22. Qb3 Nb6 23. Rg7 fxe5 24. Nxe5 Qb5 25. Rxa7 Qxb3 26. axb3 Nc8 27. Rb7 O-O?! { (1.67 → 2.29) Inaccuracy. The best move was Ne7. } (27... Ne7 28. Bg5 Nf5 29. Nxc6 h6 30. Bd2 g5 31. b4 O-O 32. Ra7 Rf7 33. Ra8+ Kg7 34. Nd8 Re7 35. Ra6 Kf6 36. b5 Re8 37. Nc6) 28. Bh6 Bxe5 29. Bxf8 Bxd4 30. Rb8 Kxf8 31. Rxc8+ Ke7 32. Rxc6 Kd7 33. Ra6 Bc5 34. Kf1 Ke7 35. Ra4 Bb6 36. Ra8 Bc5 37. Ke2 e5 38. Ra5 Kd6 39. Rb5 e4?! { (2.60 → 3.15) Inaccuracy. The best move was Kc6. } (39... Kc6 40. Rb8 e4 41. Rc8+ Kb5 42. Rc7 Kb4 43. Rxh7 Kxb3 44. f3 exf3+ 45. Kxf3 Kb4 46. Rg7 d4 47. Ke4 Kc3 48. Rd7 Kc4 49. Rc7) 40. b4 Bd4 41. Rb7 h5 42. b5 Kc5 43. Rb8 Be5 44. Rg8 Kxb5 45. Rxg6 Bc7?! { (3.08 → 3.68) Inaccuracy. The best move was Bc3. } (45... Bc3 46. Ke3 Kc5 47. Rh6 Kc4 48. Rc6+ Kb4 49. g4 hxg4 50. hxg4 Bg7 51. g5 Kb5 52. Rc7 Be5 53. Rc8 Kb6 54. Re8 Bg7 55. Rg8) 46. Rg5 Kc4 47. Rxh5 d4 48. Rh7? { (4.47 → 3.45) Mistake. The best move was h4. } (48. h4 Bd8 49. Re5 e3 50. fxe3 Bxh4 51. Kf3 Bf6 52. Re4 Kd5 53. exd4 Kd6 54. Rf4 Bg5 55. Rf5 Bd2 56. g4 Bc3 57. Ke4 Ke6) 48... Bb6 49. Rf7 Bd8 50. g3 Bb6 51. h4 d3+ 52. Kd1 Kd5?! { (5.66 → 6.60) Inaccuracy. The best move was e3. } (52... e3 53. fxe3 Bxe3 54. g4 Kc5 55. g5 Kd5 56. Rd7+ Ke6 57. Rxd3 Bc5 58. Rf3 Be7 59. Re3+ Kd7 60. Kd2 Bd8 61. Re4 Be7 62. Kd3) 53. h5 e3?! { (6.30 → 7.04) Inaccuracy. The best move was Ke6. } (53... Ke6 54. Rf4 Ke7 55. Rxe4+ Kf7 56. Rb4 Bc5 57. Rb5 Bd4 58. Rd5 Bg7 59. Rxd3 Kf6 60. Ke2 Kf5 61. Kf3 Kg5 62. Rd5+ Kh6 63. g4) 54. fxe3 { Black resigns } 1-0

Saragossa
10-09-2015, 03:13 AM
Dope. Well done Kevin.

TheARBChessSys
12-09-2015, 05:35 AM
Dope. Well done Kevin.

Definition of Dope ? :(

https://www.google.sk/search?q=dope+definition&oq=dope+definition&aqs=chrome..69i57.6946j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8

Can You work out Saragossa's Post Kevin ?

It looks more Complicated than your Games! :)

Rincewind
12-09-2015, 10:21 AM
Definition of Dope ? :(

https://www.google.sk/search?q=dope+definition&oq=dope+definition&aqs=chrome..69i57.6946j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/dope#british-1-3-1