Back to 1.e4..

First of all best wishes for the new year 2007 to you all.

Then a remark about the Bookbuilder site: unfortunately
the server superchess.com is not working at the moment,
but the site is still available at:
http://home.wxs.nl/~k.e.c/chess.html

Now some recent results:
having played some gambit lines in recent times with
my bookbuilder/rybka account on ICC, i now switched
back to the 1.e4 repertoire again. First of all, although
some gambit lines looked promising, in general the
results were not as good as i expected, eg. when
comparing with the nr 1 on FICS in standard,
Spike with a unorthodox/gambit book.
Secondly, having done some more analysis
on the Zaitsev line as described in my previous
message, i found out that with d4 (instead of
d3) in longer term still advantage with white
could be obtained, so my old 'philosophy' of
trying to obtain an advantage in all cases
for white with e4 seems possible again.

Ofcourse it still is a hypothesis, occasionally
some defence is encountered which leads
to drawish lines, but then i usually do
some more analysis and try to improve
the book. As a result the standard rating
on ICC is going up again. The Arena interface
is costing me some rating points when bugs
occur, but the opening book is getting better.

For black i'm certainly not ready yet, against
e4 , most often ..e5 is chosen, but against d4
it's not clear to me which defence is the 'best'.
Nimzo-Indian is ok when Nc3 is played,
but in other cases QGD or Slav may
be preferred above the Queens Indian which
i formally recommended.

In a few more weeks i expect to know more..

The best defence against e4 ?

with some more analysis i found a strong line for black in the
closed Ruy Lopez, namely in the Zaitsev variation.
After 9.h3 Bb7 (Zaitsev) 10. d4 Re8! 11. Nbd2 Na5 12. Bc2 black
usually plays c5 (transpositions in black move order are possible)
but what next ? For example, after 13.Ndf1 (or d5) black often
plays 13 .. Bf8, a good move, which after .. g6 (to prevent the
white Nf1g3 and then Ng3f5) makes the fianchetto Bf8g7 possible.

But black has an even stronger move, namely 13 .. exd4 !
Now after 14. cxd4, black can bring his knight on a5 back
to c6, and also later still can play Bf8, making it very hard
maybe even impossible for white to achieve advantage.

In fact, because of this defence, it might even be better
to play 10 d3. for white, or 9 d4 (Boguljubow) but
in these cases also no structural advantage is achieved.

What does this mean ?
Well, having analysed many white openings, it appeared
that in most cases with e4 white could achieve a slight
advantage. But not anymore in above line.

S.. is that black move .. exd4! a novelty ?
Well, not exactly, in the high level -Chessbase sponsored-
'freestyle' (man+computer) tournament in *this* year,
2006, Rybka, the topengine played this move against
the engine Goldbar and the game ended in a draw.

For my personal research, and the E-book better
chess opening play, it means that now other opening moves
as 1.d4, or Nf3, or even 1.c4 are fundamentally just
as good as 1.e4. A major change ?

Well not really, for beginners i still recommend
1.e4, even although you might encounter a defence
like the one give above, or difficult Sicilian lines.
Medium/tactical players probably could better
switch to a gambit repertoire, which even would
be sharper than a general 1.e4 repertoire
more about that later (i'm thinking about
listing a general gambit repertoire, when always
starting with e4, eg. 1.e4 d5 2.d4!? etc.

And indeed, advanced players can maybe better
use a more positional repertoire with 1.d4, but..
also with this move i believe not fundamental
advantage can be achieved for white, which
means chess indeed is a draw; as was expected
already many years by those knowledgeable in
the subject (and top-GM's like Anand and Karpov).

Back to the Rossolimo

With white i got some problems against the accelerated fianchetto
in the Sicilian, even when going for the Maroczy variation,
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 g6!! c4! etc.
So i tried to improve my Rossolimo variations with Bb5 instead
of d4 in the line above, and i now again achieve advantage for white.

So with these improvements my computer rating is going up again,
now with standard nr 5 on ICC.
To a large extent still due to the improved performance of Rybka
on my new AMD X2, with Windows X64 installed,
but the opening book used must also be good of course.

In fact, the higher the ratings of the opponents playing me,
the more important the quality of the book becomes,
as i've clearly seen. Small 'errors' , ie deviations from the
best book move can have big consequences, a well known
fact in chess; at least with respect to tactical errors.

New bullet record

well, as could be expected with the strong Rybka engine,
now i've also achieved a new 'bullet' (lightning/speedchess)
rating on the Internet Chess Club with the Bookbuilder account.

And upgraded my computer again, now running
with the multiprocessor version of Rybka 2.1
with a AMD X2 dual core (4200+ type).

New goal: increasing the standard rating again..
And new idea: uploading my largest Bookbuilder database
(more then 13 million positions) via the Internet
to a site like www.filestore.com; only for registered
Bookbuilder users though; as the support otherwise will
take me too much time of course.

For those interested in downloading Bookbuilder:


14 days trial
And don't forget to have fun with your chess
:)

improvements with Rybka analysis

Recent months i've checked the opening variations in my
E-book (better chess opening play) with the top engine
Rybka, now version 2.1-o UCI.
Initially it appeared to become more difficult to obtain
a structural advantage for white as result of the
less optimistich Rybka analysis, eg. when compared
with Shredder. But while continuing the analysis
new variations were found !

This new analysis is not completed yet, i'm working
on an update of the book, and testing new variations
on ICC (latest standard rating record 2851
on August this year).

Some new findings:
- against the Caro Kann the advance variation again now is preferred
again, instead of the 'English' variations with c4.
- for the Sicilian it is difficult, if not impossible
to find the 'best' defence variation for black; it appears
that different strategies are possible; currently i'm still
experimenting, eg. with Pelikan, Taimanov, and Najdorf
- also after .. e5, when white plays Bb5, the Ruy Lopez,
many different defence variations seem to be equally good,
e.g. Berlin, Cordell, closed, etc.

Yet after renewed analysis and gradually improving the
best lines for white, certain patterns in middle game
planning appear, whereby the advantage for white
with 1.e4 still remains clear in all cases.

Against 1.d4, the Nimzovitch and Queens Indian
defences remain the 'best' defences in practice,
as result of a complete minimax of my large database.
Having recently acquired part 2 of Shereshky's
excellent book Endgame strategy, closed games,
it appeared that i've discovered something which
some Russian top chessanalysts apparently already knew,
namely that the above mentioned 'light square' (bish0p)
strategy is better for black than the black square strategy
like Kings Indian, Slav (with c6), etc. And if black would choose
the QGD it has to be played very carefully, i.e. with moves
like Bb4, in order to adhere to the black square strategy.

It certainly is encouraging that i've achieved similar
conclusions with my own computer analysis, which
means that for th 1.e4 variations we are not far away
of almost 'perfect' results. NB for such results i've
have to extend the analysis as done by Shereshevky
in his Endgame strategy part I book (open games)
to deeper lines, and the results will soon be puslished
in the latest version of the E-book 'better chess opening
play' on www.superchess.com

NB believe it or not, the second hand version of
the excellent, highly original, and apparenlty quite
rare book part I for open games by Shereshvky
now is selling at Amazon.com for a price
of more than 1000 dollars.

So buying my E-book book, including the new version
-when it becomes available in a few weeks- certainly
won't be a bad deal, as it is much more up to date
compared with the rather oldfashioned variations
and games as published by S., and..
last but not least you get the computer
program Bookbuilder included..
:)

ICC standard rating record

not suprising, with the new engine Rybka 1.1 achieved a new
rating record on ICC (2843), at about 10th place. With faster
hardware i believe an even higher rating could easily be achieved.
No human GM is capable of achieving such ratings on ICC..

All games played with self made book, own 1.e4! repertoire,
sometimes 1.a3 as suprise, and the Arena chess interface.

The eval of this super engine Rybka clearly is different
from Shredder, which we still use in FICS, so some lines
eg. in the Ruy Lopez are played a bit differently.

As a result next action will be to update our 'best'
variants again on our site www.superchess.com.
And yes, thereafter the goal is to achieve
yet another new rating record..
:)

new computer chess engines

this year (2005) a new engine came into the market,
started as an amateur engine, but being able to
beat some of the top commercial programs,
and quickly became commercial as well.

which it will do simply after some testing and, then adding
endgame database probing, some more tuning, and finally
a lot of brouhaha on discussion list such as www.icdchess.com

this latest hype was the socalled Rybka engine,
from obviously another gifted programmer (from MIT,
so no surprise that he's a top IT profession )
and.. het is an IM chess player !

Now programming a chess program at top level of
course is far from easy, but there is a lot of competition,
and basically the top programs are not so
different in strenght, compared to each other.

But in general the modern chess programs are still gaining
an amazing improvement every year, not only because
of some very clever programming innovations
w.r.t. to search techniques, but also adding chess knowledge
without slowing down the program (the latter must be some
modern type of secret invented by some top programmers)
And also simply because of law's Moore, namely the increase
in hardware speed, the programs get stronger every year.

As result of the inherent complexities in the chess middle
game, playing against a chess computer is becoming more
and more difficult for human chess players, and that includes even
the top grand masters such as Michael Adams who was crushed
this year by the hardware monster Hydra (software programmed
mainly by C.Donninger, programmer of former PC program Nimzo).

Where will this lead in a few decades ?
Nobody knows, there still are obvious weaknesses in many
chess programs, in middle game planning, and in endgame
strategy; they currently for example usually cannot foresee
socalled fortresses, even when a strong human chess
player can use such 'tricks' in trying to keep
a draw against these monsters..

maybe we should give up chess and go to Go ?
:) Well i don't know, but anyway,
Best wishes for the end of year holidays
and a happy new year 2006

New blitz rating record

well, my computer chess repertoire with e4 still seems to work,
achieved a blitz rating record with my Kec(C) account on Fics,
above 2600, and entered now also the ranks of the highest ten :)

a new update of my book now is available !

with a more appropriate title:
"How to improve your opening play" !

see selected pages at: www.superchess.com

and the winner is ..: kec(C)

Yes folks, we now have achieved nr one position in standard chess on FICS (the Free American Chess Server)
with my own repertoire (with Arena interface & Shredder engine)
So.. the repertoire as described in my book now has been verified
in ''real life'' as well.

while my blog only seems to receive attention from some ladies(?)
trying to invite me for some ''free'' dating sites, i'm
still planning to finalize the book ''a better repertoire'',
and then probably publish it via POD (printing on demand)
methods, and/or maybe via a publisher.

anyone interested in cooperating in this effort,
either as ghost writer, chess analyst, or publisher
is welcome to reply; yes and dating sites as well, but i will
not bother to use a credit card for such things, you know..
:-)

Jef

new chess book

well people, here's my new chess book;
sofar no hard criticism, maybe also
coz i've done quite some research on
the subject, and even have been a bit
self-critical, calling the concept of a better
chess opening repertoire controversial:

here are some selected pages:

http://home.planet.nl/~k.e.c/chessbk_sel_chapters.pdf

in the meantime we are going to look for a publisher,
and extend the book from about 60 to more than 150 pages.

the only opening book beginners need to have !

good luck with *real* chess i would say..
:)
Jef

cool

why computer chess is cool;
well that's simple, it's always different;
you can compile Craftty with DevC++,
update your repertoire with Bookbuilder,
and basically, just have fun.

In the meantime, in my repertoire my
ICS accounts have gone back to the Tarrasch
in the French, personally i'm still busy
trying to get a (C) account on FICS
(for my Djenghis account now all sanctions
already have been removed) and
still busy trying 'solving' chess, i.e.
trying to find a better opening repertoire..

Nope, not will succeed in my lifetime
but it's not impossible Nah, maybe
coz of the 50 move Fide endgame rule.
Let's say a knight is blocking a pawn.
And there are some more pieces.
Mate in 135. Bad luck for black.
Ah well, lets talk about that later
:)

opening repertoire, a little update

well after some more numbercrunching, my opening
repertoire/strategy has changed a bit for black;
not for white, i still believe in 1.e4 !

For myself, being a lousy Otb player, i just play
..e5 with black against e4. And against d4, well,
the Bogo-Indian might be a bit easier than
the Queens Indian. Advantage of the latter is
keeping the bishop pair in the endgame, but
muddling yourself through the middlegame
is a bit difficult, as usually a complicated positional
struggle, involving dominance in the center,
pawn advances, etc. are quite common.

For computers: well, against e4 i don't hesitate
to recommend the Sicilian, but because of the
Rossolimo (B5 against Nc6) i now recommend the
Najdorf; yep, very complicated, but a comp can do it.
And most GM's as well. And having looked at
some recent Linares games (2005) as well as
some more analysis, instead of the agressive
moves Bc4 and f4 against the Najdorf, the more
quiet Be2 or Be3 now seem a bit better imho.

And against d4? Well i need to improve my
queens indian book; comps are not so good in positional
play, so with Arena (www.playwitharena.com) i also
choose to defend with the Bogo (named after Boguljyobov)
sometimes; even although it sometimes is costing a bishop.

Yet after a while probably the Queens Indian is more solid.
And Kings Indian ?
Nope, don't like it.
While i can't refute it, as it leads to some unbalanced endgames,
it doesn't seem to be rock solid to me, in a fundamental sense.
Same with the Gruenfeld.

Until next time,
Jef

engines and correspondence chess

ever wondered what the best program, aka 'engine' is
for correspondence chess ? Well with Chessbase engines
like Fritz 8, Shredder, Junior etc. it is possible to use
a correspondence mode, and let your comp krunch
the whole knight about a variant.

But what is it doing then ? Well, after a certain number
of moves, it simply continues, and makes a tree
for a number of subvariants (which you can choose
in the options). Now ideally such a tree would
be backsolved according to an alfa-beta algorithm,
whereby transpositions also are taken into account.

Is the Chessbase program doing that ?
No sir, it's not !

A whole big tree is calculated for all kinds of
variants, which can contain many transpositions,
and then a complete minimax is done. This
means *lots* of inferior variants are calculated into
much more depth than necessary; a waste of time !!

No, probably with an engine as DeepShredder, and a
powerful multiprocessor machine would be more
useful for the postal chess player, just by going
to the variants manually, scrolling back and
forth through the variants, and letting the hash
tables 'remember' the results (i.e. evaluation).

Still at higher levels it might help to have some
knowledge about endgame strategy, to find
the best lines during the middlegame.
Engines probably are just an aid, just like
a GM as J.Piket most likely recently has been
for the brandnew world champ correspondence
chess Van Oosterom.. ( a patzer anyway, as
he usually is opening with 1.d4?!).

the best chess repertoire

Although controversial (all normal chess opening variants are
considered to be equallystrong), with the program Bookbuilder
i found a 'best' repertoire: with white 1.e4!
No i'm not going to give all the subvariants, but some
important decisions have to be made also in later
moves to keep the white opening advantage; yes,
especially against the Sicilian; urgh, quite complicated indeed.

So can white also win against the Ruy Lopez Berlin defence ?
Well i don't know, probably yes, with proper play.
Computers are not so good in endgame strategy, some
books by eg. Shereshevsky demonstrate his obviously.

Against d4 Nf6 and if 2.c4 e6, and then:

Nimzo-Queens Indian hybrid system (after Nf3 b6! and after Nc3 Bb4!),
yes there are lots of variants in this complex.
No fancy Benoni, Benko, Kings Indian, though.

Against other white moves: ah well, not so important,
currently there's c5 against the English (symmetrical variant),
..d5 agains Reti, etc. (often transposing to the d4 variants).

Resultant improvement in playing strength:
well i don't know, i estimate its only about 50 points or so.
Comps are not afraid of gambits and unorthodox openings,
so such a repertoire would cost about 50 points on average.
But for humans, up to master level, with proper knowledge
an preparation, it could be an advantage. But then tactics
and middlegame planning are more important of course..

Back to FICS now again..
c.u. later.. :)

internet chess servers

ever wondered how computers can get 3600 blitz rating on ICC ?
well we all know of course, they don't play other computers,
have !computer in their formula, and play only humans.

And then the ratings on ICC are calculated differently
than those on FICS; the latter is using RD, which
leads to much more conservative values. And
also more realistic values for these stupid chips..

Any other experiences with comps; on
playchess.com or so ? just wondering..

well letz start

well lets start with this blog; blogging seems to be very cool,
so instead of making some elaborate project plan, its
just a matter of hitting the keyboard, en letz see..

now it would be cool to make a blog over computer chess
of course, spending so much time on it by making an
opening book for my bookbuilder account on the
internet chessclub (www.chessclub.com), but i guess
i first need to see how this thing works in order
to organize the various thoughts, blabla, etc.

in any case i want to keep the whole thing on topic,
that is, about computer chess; a wide field anyway,
that's for sure, and probably keeping me busy for
a while with this stuff. a nice distraction from
the engines, the servers, the bishops and knights,
the pgn, EPD's, and all the other stuff. Aargh
indeed, when the hash tables are overloaded
again, Arena is crashing with some access violation,
and my so carefully built-up (Comp)rating is going
down again; that's life i guess, sometimes i even
wonder why people takes these chips so seriously..