chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Michael Adams vs Hydra (Computer)
Adams - Hydra Match (2005), London ENG, rd 6, Jun-27
Sicilian Defense: Kan. Polugaevsky Variation (B42)  ·  0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 5 more Adams/Hydra games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: As you play through the game, you can get the FEN code for any position by right-clicking on the board and choosing "Copy Position (EPD)". Copy and paste the FEN into a post to display a diagram.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 47 OF 47 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jul-05-05  acirce: <WannaBe> What are you talking about? Who do you think you are? He obviously meant Nc4. What reason can there possibly be for you to go on with aggressive insults like that? This is a forum, show some basic respect for God's sake or leave.

Not to mention the irony in you lambasting people for their lack of chess knowledge.

Jul-05-05  Jaymthetactician: <It may be my ego talking saying...> No, you are a *&#$# idiot raving lunatic and @@!# &^%$hole.

Correction: I meant Nc4, but now I think 35.Nf3 would be better, though after 35...gxf5 36.Bxf5 black is still better. I didnt say my analyisis was better then the game, but merely stated that's what I would play from the position.

Also, it's sad how you can talk to someone like that. I would expect that language on a Wrestling or football forum (very uncivilized people are a fanbase in those spheres), but NOT on a chess forum where were supposed to be civil!

Jul-05-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  WannaBe: I don't brag about my chess knowledge, I don't go around claim my 'genius' or 'tactical' knowledges and make comments like some people do. I know my chess level and playing skill, or the lack thereof. That's why my handle is a 'humble' handle.
Jul-05-05  Jaymthetactician: Rocafella: <Jaymthetactician> It strikes me as odd when you say you are a genius. If you check the profile for <Jaymthegenius> you will realise you have spelt 'Positional' wrong

yes, I've noticed, my style of play swing's so far towards tactical that I can't spell positional correctly.

are you the same rockafeller from chess.ac? You resigned off of time forfiet when I hung a piece on you (but you hung a piece when I was black in a pirc/modern so we would turn out even. It is in my game collection.

Jul-05-05  Rocafella: <Jaymthegenius> No I am not that 'Rockafeller'. I couldn't keep up with you, or half of the chess players on this site in an OTB game. As you will see, my posts focus mainly on picking out errors, (which i apologise for) rather than analysing play or submitting useful comments.
Jul-05-05  acirce: <WannaBe> In any case you should observe the posting guidelines. If a user annoys you so much that you can't handle it, put him on your ignore list: ChessGames.com Help
Jul-05-05  Jaymthetactician: my posts focus mainly on picking out errors

making errors are what I am best at in chess! Very often throwing away a huge edge due to basic inattention or an urge to be brilliant.

Jul-05-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  WannaBe: <acirce> Yes, I know. First time I broke the guidelines rule. :-(
Jul-05-05  Jaymthetactician: Also, later sometime I may give more analyisis.
Jul-06-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  patzer2: The move of Hydra that impresses me most in this game is the quiet but strong 28...Qe8!, preparing to take more space and giving Black flexible attacking options on both wings.

From this post, Black is able to maneuver the Queen and shatter the White position in short order, so that after 38...Qe2+! Black has a won ending against White's weak queenside pawn structure.

Jul-07-05  Jaymthetactician: 38.Qg3? I think was the mistake that allowed black to infiltrate, now no matter what black is better, but white should fight for drawing chances with 38.Nc4, but this dropes a pawn, but I see the nicely posted knight as compensation. I'm not saying my move is better, but it might be.
Jul-10-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  patzer2: <Jaythetactician> After looking at it with Fritz 8, I can see why you considered 38. Qg3?!, which allowed 38...Qe2+!, not particularly helpful for Adams.

However, after your recommended <38. Nc4!?> Black can play 38...Bxc5! when White is a pawn down, has an inferior position and doesn't appear to be much better off than in the game continuation (note that now 39. Nxe5?? would lose immediately to the pin 39...Bd6!). Black's superior Queenside pawn structure and safer King position seem to guarantee Hydra a strong advantage in this position.

With 38. Nc4!? or 38. Rb1!? or 38. Bc4!? White should be able to put up better resistance than with 38. Nc4?! (especially against a fallable human opponent). But against this monster, Hydra, White would likely have had a very difficult task saving the draw.

Jul-19-05  Jaymthetactician: Perhaps I'm dreaming of drawing chances that dont exist here, but I've seen a side down a pawn, or even a whole piece where a draw is unavoidable with best play (bishop and queen vs. queen with both kings around the center, king vs. king and h pawn for example).

Also, 12...Bxe3 may be better for black, because after 12...Nd4 13.Qh5,Nxb3 14.Bxa7,Rxa7 15.axb3,b6 16.f4,exf4 or 16...Ng6 and white is doing fine because of blacks misplaced rook and whites doing quite ok.

Jul-19-05  Jaymthetactician: I checked with a computer and my line isnt that much better then the game, still, my calculation abilities are quite impressive provided I don't lose focus or track of my plan.
Jul-19-05  euripides: <With 38. Nc4!? or 38. Rb1!? or 38. Bc4!? White should be able to put up better resistance than with 38. Nc4?! >

Yes. White should have paid more attention to his punctuation.

Jul-19-05  aw1988: <my calculation abilities are quite impressive provided I don't lose focus or track of my plan.> There's a problem here unfortunately; what happens if your opponent suddenly starts dictating the play onto another field?
Jul-20-05  Jaymthetactician: There's a problem here unfortunately; what happens if your opponent suddenly starts dictating the play onto another field?

That's when I usually lose and lose focus as I start calculating from square one again, I like to focus on one weakness (IE: hole on d5 (d4 as black) and put alot of pressure on a certain point of the board, and if this cannot be done then a new set of plan's comes to mind.

Aug-07-05  LIFE Master AJ: Back to the game ... many people - especially those persons who really do not understand the game ... are under the impression that Hydra played perfect chess. (Nothing could be further from the truth.) IF you are interested, I have annotated this game for "The World Chess Academy" web-site. (http://www.worldchessacademy.com/Ad...)
Aug-07-05  who: <AJ> I always feel that it's a bit dubious to use Fritz to judge Hydra. When you use your intuition to point out the weakness of black's d4 pawn you are saying even if there is no concrete variation that wins the d4 pawn, in the long term the pawn is likely to fall. Your long term intuition about a chess position is likely better than even Hydra's. However, Fritz is calculating concrete variations same as Hydra. Yes they may give slightly different weights to different positions, but in the long run it is the program that can calculate further that is probably a better evaluator - in this case Hydra. Just a thought. Can you give a little more analysis of the variation starting with 38.g5?
Aug-11-05  LIFE Master AJ: <who> You bring up a valid point, it is also a beautiful piece of logic, eloquently written.

All I can counter with is that most GM's - say Garry Kasparov or John Nunn, just to give two examples - feel that if Fritz gives White a large advantage, it is correct. (Although, I must admit, the exact weighting of any advantage is open to some partial debate; expecially in those positions that lack a concrete material advantage ... or a decisive combination such as a forced "mate in X" number of moves.)

By the way, I saw an article - I believe it was on the NIC website - where a GM said pretty much the same thing. (That Hydra did not play perfectly, and Adams failed to exploit some positions correctly.) And sorry - I did not save the link.

Aug-24-05  Jaymthetactician: Thats what I've been trying to tell everyone with my analysis! Though seeing as how Adolf Anderssen probably would play the same thing as what I said compare my note (12...Bxe3 I would play as black, but after 12...Nd4 13.Qh5,Nxb3 14.Bxa7,Rxa7 15.axb3,b6 16.f4,exf4 or 16...Ng6 ) with

Adolf Anderssen vs Staunton, 1851

I may change my analysis.

Aug-24-05  Jaymthetactician: Also note how Anderssen doesnt misplace the knight to b3, but kept it strong on d4 while continuing development (though in this game it would hang the knight after 5.Bd3, I like 5.c4 better, as you have a bind and can keep a strong knight after Bd3, which I personally believe to be an invitation to misplace the white knight away from the center). In this game allow's black to exchange pieces on e3, helping to stop an attack from white.

Also what do people think of in this game 9.Qg4,0-0 10.Nc3,Bd7 11.Qg3 (11.Be3,Bxe3 12.fxe3 is also good) And why didnt Adam's play it? He would have built a strong attack with it.

The game is still better then Anderrsen vs. Staunton though.

Sep-04-05  LIFE Master AJ: <all> Several people have written me e-mails about this game ...

All I can say is that Adams played the first part of the game pretty convincingly, and built up a fairly solid edge.

Then "Mikey" proceeded to play a whole string of moves ... many were less than best. He ended this process with a blunder, that allowed Black to win on the spot.

See my analysis on the page - http://www.worldchessacademy.com/Ad....

Sep-20-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  lostemperor: I have read something very disturbing in the Adams interview about this match and only mention this now http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail...

Question:
<Given the controversy surrounding the 1997 Kasparov-Deep Blue match, were there any checks put in place to ensure there is no human intervention in the Hydra evaluation or move-selection process during the match?>

Adams: <I wasn’t really concerned about that possibility. In any case it would be impossible for me to tell, because Hydra plays a very different game to any other computer that I ever saw. Even in these six games it actually played differently to anything I saw in its own previous games, so it’s not easy to judge. But no, I don’t have any suspicions about human intervention. That’s not something that concerned me.>

But this concerns the whole chessworld. I am not saying human intervention has happened (I usually do not think about conspiracies) and if Adams said it would be impossible for him to tell, or not easy to judge, this would certainly count for me. But it was not impossible as it was also stated!

There is no doubt that chessprograms are very strong but I was hoping we would have learned from the Kasparov vs Deep Blue match by now that checks in a match, especially one like this, are crucial. Not just for humans but also in the interest of the machine. This match will only have any (present and future) scientifical and sport's value if it was transparent and checked.

Top chessplayers should know their responsibilities. The conditions for a man vs machine match should be clear. There should be independent observers, arbiters and experts present all the way in Abu Dhabi, where the computer was located.

Hydra was a very comercial program. A CNN report before the match said, the goal was to try to sell the computer to a firm for other purposes. Top-chessplayers sometimes seem not wanting to look beyond the board. They figure if no one of the top ten players is involved in the computerteam it must be the computer who beat them. But they tend to forget that the combination of man + machine is lethal. An ordinary grandmaster and an ordinary computer is stronger than a super-grandmaster. In fact the freestyle tournament proved that even an amateur with computer is stronger than any top grandmaster and any super computer! Hydra included. Just a few months before this match.

So I hope the above mentioned question will still be answered. Also that Hydra will play matches still. Not going the same way Deep Blue did. Otherwise history has repeated itself.

Nov-26-05  powershaker: I think something is amiss with this man versus machine debate! I just simply do not believe Kasparov was beaten by only a machine in his match! I believe someone cheated him (namely corporate IBM) and I think something is amiss with the Hydra game also. The fact is this: if a company is going to go through millions of dollars or more in research to produce a chess monster, then that machine represents that company's best efforts. Thus, it's a reflection on the company alone and its production quality. Plainly put, the corporate world is dirty nasty! Put them in with chess, and you dirty the game! Let Kasparov carry Deep Blue home with him with cameras, and he would have crushed it like he did in the first game. Let Michael Adams do the same, and watch what happens! Screw corporate America!
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 47)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 47 OF 47 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Adams vs. Hydra "Man vs. Machine"
by Chessbrain
Match Adams!
by docjan
Match Adams!
by amadeus
GM vs Computer
by larrewl
Between 28...Qe8! and 38. Qe2+! Hydra wins
from Forcing Weak Pawns by patzer2
Computer - GM games 2003-2008
by biglo
++++ Polugaevsky
from A A Anti-Sicilian.Najdorf (Kan) [Black] by Patca63
Keyes
by NimbleKnight
Recent Sicilians, Kan
by AbhinavAsthana
++++ Polugaevsky
from A A Anti-Sicilian.Najdorf (Kan) [Black] by chess.master
Recent Sicilians, Kan
by Patca63

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC