Marijus Kulvietis: The tournament is coming to an end.
Let's summerize the main pecularities of the round 10.

1/EUGEN 7.92-WCHESS2000. 0-1

GM B. Annakov: The number of draws is decreasing in the motion. The only one draw has been
achieved in this round!
But let's start from the very beginning. A lucid outsider EUGEN lost again.
It seems that this weak program can be beaten by any competitioner.

GM A. Kharlov: In fact we have already realized that this EUGEN cannot compete in this tournament
properly. This time WCHESS got a weak rival and earned a point in spite that the BLACK
didn't have any particular advantage and would have been satisfied with a draw.
However the weak EUGEN managed to play a bad game and lost it. Some of EUGEN moves
were so bad and not logical, that it's simply impossible to comment and understand them.
Neither activity nor wish to fight. Of course, the BLACK gained victory although
they didn't show nice and inventive playing. EUGEN simply has made a present to WCHESS.
That's why neither of the programes can be praised. What concerns the EUGEN founders, they should
think whether such a remarkably lagging behind program is worthy of creation.


Marijus Kulvietis: Not long ago we praised PATZER for a not bad playing and rather
sensational appearance among famous programs. Recently however a series of a bit not successful scores have followed.
Now, as we can see PATZER has won a very important victory.

IM Oleg Krivonosov: We have already told that PATZER is playing rather seriously while
SOCRATES has played not well. The result is evident.

IM Vaidas Sakalauskas: A correct theory of SCOTISH game lasted long enough,
however when a text book game came to an end SOCRATES began making mistakes.
First of all it allowed the BLACK to make a draw position and afterwards it played the endgame
so badly that in some moves PATZER managed to use the won position easily.

IM Oleg Krivonosov: The game can be described as follows:
1-20 moves-made according to the theory.
20-28 moves- a short fight when it became clear at once that SOCRATES didnt understand the situation
and PATZER proved to be much more clever.
Consequently the latter received a won position.
The 28 move-the end of the game.
All the rest was just the realization of already won position.
Conclusion-PATZER has proved it's superiority in 8 moves:)
All the rest is only theory and technique.

3/COMET-GENIUS6.5 .0-1

Marijus Kulvietis: The third victory in turn achieved by the BLACK.

GM B. Annakov: We had been long critisizing GENIUS and were near writting it off.
For what we regret a little. Nevertheless it is an old and famous program. In spite that it is falling behind
from the world's favorites it is popular among the amateurs. It is convenient to play with at home.
It is a pity that GENIUS had seemed hopelessly weaker in ODYSSEY tournament for a long time.
And at last a very important victory-in black color.

GM A. Kharlov: The victory wasn't easy. An interesting and changeable game and a point achieved in a hard fight.
I wouldn't like to hurt the authors of COMET saying I'm pleased to see popular GENIUS having won the respectable point after a persistant struggle andat least having been somehow rehabilitated.

GM B. Annakov: The game was really an efficient one. COMET had many chances to save
itself using moves for a draw ending, but we must understand that both programs are determined
for gaining victory and they simply don't look for a drawn game.
That's why COMET was playing until the checkmate.:)
I wonder if GENIUS will suceed to repeat victory in this tournament.


Marijus Kulvietis: CRAFTY seems to have recovered after painful failure in the round 9.
And to have achieved the priciple point too.

IM Oleg Krivonosov: Astonishing instability. The loss to CRAFTY programin the round 9
Was simply a catastrophy. CRAFTY at that time seemed hopeless , but now it has made quite a different impression. The game was of remarkable higher level and it wasn't so easy to win .

IM Vaidas Sakalauskas: The result didn't come soon and easily. The tactics in middlegame didn't give any advantage. Both programs came up to an endgame- a weak part of the engines. And only here LITTLE GOLIATH seemed to have a lost endgame. The human would have realized it immediately. I think the programs didn't understand and and were playing until the game itself proved that after an equal duel CRAFTY was wining because it's endgame position was simply won.
Besides I can say that CRAFTY program was a little success. LITTLE GOLIATH went to a lost endgame itself. Of course, it was necessary to know how to realize exactly that won position.. CRAFTY made it without any rude mistakes. And deserved a needed point.


Marijus Kulvietis: The duel of two not very clear programs…It would be difficult to guess it's score in advance.

GM B. Annakov: The motion was going on not clearly. An "academic" RuyLOPEZ game, however both rivals were trying to complicate the game originally in the middlegame. A positional duel didn't fit there traditionally for both programs. And they both tried to look for tactical complications.
Unfortunately the search of adventures for GROMIT ended in disaster while VIRTUAL CHESS
Simply took the victory.

GM A. Kharlov: I could say even in a more strict form. It is a typical real poverty of computer chess.

It was a positional game and it needed stronger solutions. Instead both sides showed that a positional playing didn't fit for computers. Tactical complications were being looked for .
It was difficult to say whether that result could reflect the capacity of the programs right.
That time there was a following script:
Who is eager to look for adventures-sooner or later will experience trouble in his way.
So GROMIT was the first to confirm it.

6/ChessSystemTal- MCHESS. 1-0

Marijus Kulvietis: One more short game. MCHESS presented some sensations in this tournament, but it couldn't avoid a fast defeat to TAL……

IM Oleg Krivonosov: I can't understand what were the BLACK counting in this game-starting from the opening. I think that the previous victories of MCHESS were determined by successful counting.
But here in a rare opening variation this program seemed foolish/I'm sorry/. A lot of bad solutions.
They can be justified by the only logic-MCHESS were trying to achieve typical computer game, situations-when a tactical counting results the game.

IM Vaidas Sakalauskas: I agree completely. As well as in the previously described game here the
Only aim was tactics, tactics and once more tactics. Both sides seemed to be not satisfied with the not "clear for them" situation after opening. And they began a sharp, complicated struggle.
The outcome-an open "computer" tactics that brought MCHESS to a complete fiasco.
It's evident there is no use to interfere into a romantic tactical fight when playing against a program
Having the name of "TAL"::


Marijus Kulvietis: At last a famous FRITZ program managed to win after unsuccessful playing.

GM B. Annakov: It is possible to say that the truth was restored. Indeed a stronger program won.
FRITZ was playing as a stronger rival the whole game. Starting from the much better opening and following the continuation. It had an advantage, better position- kept it till the end winning very clearly. It simply overplayed the rival
That was remarkable weaker.

GM A. Kharlov: There's no doubt DEEP FRITZ is namely the program playing as a grandmaster. The same can't be said about ZARKOV. It is not so stable. It can play well, however it's far from FRIT's
Capacity. That's interesting that FRITZ program has won the point and can return to rivality with the tournament leaders. Much more intrigue in the final stages of ODYSSEY.


Marijus Kulvietis: Well, we felt sorry for HIARCS program and it unexpectedly made a surprise-won a game against much promising REBEL-TIGER…..

IM Oleg Krivonosov: Everything in this game turned out very very soon.
REBEL-TIGER is determined for a tactical fight, it played the opening badly and fell into trouble.
Silently playing in this tournament HIARCS got a good position after the opening and when REBEL-TIGER was trying somehow to attack, HIARCS had a chance to play an "ITALIAN football"-
To make a counter attack when the rival give that possibility.

IM Vaidas Sakalauskas: HIARCS didn't show any wonders here too, but REBEL-TIGER
Simply lost.
It played the opening badly, tried to attack, but failed while HIARCS was quietly waiting, making correct
Moves and stayed calm to the happy end. An inadequate REBEL-TIGER tactics finished with the endgame where HIARCS had the advantage of 2 pawns.
Any program could realize easily that advantage.
It was an unlucky round for REBEL-TIGER and a point received as a present for HIARCS.
There was an impression that weakness of REBEL-TIGER appeared when choosing either to turn towards REBEL-CENTURY style or to GAMBIT-TIGER.
Evidently an attempt to stand on the crossway hasn't given good results up to now.


Marijus Kulvietis: We're speaking again about our potential adversary- a new GANDALF
Program. In the last round GANDALF received an easy victory.
SHREDDER4 demonstrated not bad tactical abilities.
GANDALF has won this round again -must we really be worried about that?

GM B. Annakov: Wait a little with Your anxiety. Both programs demonstrated a bad opening and a positional playing. Later on SHREDDER4 again tried to flash as a tactical warman. I'm sorry for it.
It played not badly and it attacked interestingly, however this time the enemy seemed to be more
Capable to count. Attacks failed and the endgame came without 2 pawns.

GM A. Kharlov: GANDALF makes a good impression. Besides in this game we can also speak about the "Italian football" variation. SHREDDER4 was attacking and dictating the rhythm of the game.
GANDALF defended correctly and when the enemy was exausted, hit it back.
Such is a short script of the game. SHREDDER4 lacked seriousness. We also
Can't speak about real GANDALF abilities yet, because this game was more resulted from the enemy's

10/YACE BERLIN-JUNIOR 7. 1/2-1/2

Marijus Kulvietis: It's a rather long time when the famous JUNIOR 7 has not been doing well and this time has to be satisfied with a drawn game against YACE…..

IM Oleg Krivonosov: It is important for JUNIOR when counting points and pretending to the prize winning place, but this program has done it's best. We have already mentioned
That JUNIOR imposes on masters as a good counter of variants.However:first-YACE BERLIN seemed
Strong enough and it was impossible to attack it blindly.
Second-JUNIOR7 showed iniative playing in black and it is worthy of praising.
Simply there were no clear possibilities to attack and to win.
A draw in this game is a right and logic result.

IM Vaidas Sakalauskas: JUNIOR7 can be praised for not doing any adventurous complications.
This confirms once more it's counting capacity. It was a duel of two rather equal competitioners.
YACE BERLIN didn't give up to the dangerous rival and formed a drawn game against more titled enemy. This game was one of the most qualitative games of the round 10.
No rude mistakes, no blind attacks were noticed. Programs had stopped where it was needed to stop and to say: DRAW. They did it. GOOD feature for engines!


Marijus Kulvietis: It's a very important victory for CENTURY, trying to reach a prize winning place.

GM B. Annakov: One more defeat experienced by CHESSMASTER. Shows that this nice program has it's place somewhere in the middle of the board. It is not able to fight against strong world famous tops as SHREDDER5, CENTURY, JUNIOR……
CENTURY4 played simply and surely using it's superiority from the very beginning.

GM A. Kharlov: Yes, it is difficult to appoint one mistake determining the result in this duel.
When speaking about the playing people we say: " lost by a class". It means that the enemy
According to his playing level was simply superior in all aspects. So CHESSMASTER looked after the defeat to powerful SHREDDER5 in the last round. So CHESSMASTER looked after loosing to CENTURY 4. in this round.
Simply CENTURY4 was much superior than his rival according to it's level from the beginning to the end. In every decision. Similar duels aren't very interesting. It is better to see CENTURY4 playing against proper strong opponents.


Marijus Kulvietis: It is one of the most interesting duels. Both pretending to the leaders,
Both programs being alike according to their serious solid style.

IM Oleg Krivonosov: No doubt, in this competition GAMBIT-TIGER has strengthened it's
Pretensions to the leader's ranks, while NIMZO has experienced a painful blow. The game
Has justified prognozes. An open, aggressive tactical struggle was going on and for a long time it was
Difficult to guess the endof the game. It witnessed the similarity of the rival's style and capacity.
NIMZO at first again seemed more aggressive, but it was difficult to say when it suppressed it's attack, reduced strain trading pieces. I think that NIMZO had a chance to win.

IM Vaidas Sakalauskas: The middle of the game was rather dramatic, having fighting spirit and by the same incoherent. BLACK really seemed aggressive, but after exchanging pieces GAMBIT-TIGER
Suddenly got a nice chance to attack the weakened king of the BLACK. The later were fighting long and well, but being weaker began to rush about, got confused and at the end of the game made a fatal mistakes. It gave up very soon.
As the competitioners were very much alike and understanding each other well: no long empty game was continued:This is wonderful by the way:
The perfect computer tactics was the only one that determined everything. It's complicated for a man to analyse such game. There are a lot of long-sighted tactical countings. GAMBIT-TIGER succeeded.
Although the rivals were of equal value and the duel was impressive.


Marijus Kulvietis: This is the last contest having given one more very important point to the leader of the competition.

GM B. Annakov: I think the leader must be very happy:
If GAMBIT-TIGER-NIMZO duel seemed to be like a real finale-here we saw quite a different
Script. PHARAON was playing well and had to win. But it couldn't realize win position in a simple way
And was obliged to try to make a draw. The programs however don't want to recognize a draw. So
PHARAON having missed the chance to win, in any way trying to reach victory, what in fact, pushed it in making fatal mistakes. On the contrary it was necessary to do a draw, but PHARAON went on playing for victory until the game was lost.
It hadn't to be forgotten that SHREDDER5 is a strong and dangerous beast! And it doesn't forgive
Any mistakes.

GM A. Kharlov: First of all I would like to praise PHARAON/former ZCHESS/ for an excellent
And persistent playing. It was so near the victory against the autocratic leader. In spiet of the fact that persistence tripped the WHITE up and made a present to the BLACK let's not depreciate this game.
SHREDDER5 is a powerful program. It's succeeded in this round ,but it is certainly worthy
Of the leader's name.

Marijus Kulvietis: After the triumph in the 10 round there's only a step separating SHREDDER5 from the champion's name in the most gigantic chess program's tournament of 2001-ODYSSEY.
Let's go on watching the finish...

Kaunas 2001.12.25

 1. PHARAON 2.5,              (12) - (1)  SHREDDER5,                 0:1
 2. GAMBIT-TIGER14.6,          (2) - (20) NIMZO8,                    1:0
 3. CHESSMASTER8000 1.0.4.,    (6) - (10) REBEL-CENTURY4,            0:1
 4. YACE BERLIN,              (24) - (9)  JUNIOR7,                   ˝:˝
 5. SHREDDER4 CHESSBITS,       (5) - (11) GANDALF432H,               0:1
 6. REBEL-TIGER14.6,           (3) - (4)  HIARCS7.01,                0:1
 7. DEEP FRITZ,                (8) - (13) ZARKOV4.5T,                1:0
 8. CHESS SYSTEM TAL2.03,     (14) - (23) MCHESS8,                   1:0
 9. VIRTUAL-CHESS2,            (7) - (26) GROMIT 3.8.1,              1:0
10. CRAFTY 18.12,             (19) - (16) LITTLE-GOLIATH2000V3,      1:0
11. COMET B36,                (18) - (21) GENIUS6.5 CZUB-STYLE,      0:1
12. SOCRATES X,               (22) - (17) PATZER311B,                0:1
13. EUGEN7.92,                (25) - (15) WCHESS2000,                0:1
Download the games of round-10 in PGN format.
                       Tournament: Odyssey-2001
Place    Name                           Sco      MBch Buch Ws
   1   SHREDDER5, (1)                   8.5       44˝  55   7
   2   GAMBIT-TIGER14.6, (2)            7.5       42˝  55˝  6
   3   REBEL-CENTURY4, (10)             6.5       45˝  58˝  5
 4-7   NIMZO8, (20)                     6.0       46   59   5
       PHARAON 2.5, (12)                6.0       43   53   4
       YACE BERLIN, (24)                6.0       40˝  50   4
       GANDALF432H, (11)                6.0       38˝  46   5
 8-9   JUNIOR7, (9)                     5.5       47   57   3
       DEEP FRITZ, (8)                  5.5       46   59   3
10-17  PATZER311B, (17)                 5.0       45   55   3
       CHESSMASTER8000 1.0.4., (6)      5.0       43˝  53˝  4
       CRAFTY 18.12, (19)               5.0       42˝  50˝  4
       SHREDDER4 CHESSBITS, (5)         5.0       38˝  47˝  2
       CHESS SYSTEM TAL2.03, (14)       5.0       37   48˝  2
       HIARCS7.01, (4)                  5.0       36˝  43   3
       GENIUS6.5 CZUB-STYLE, (21)       5.0       35˝  44˝  3
       VIRTUAL-CHESS2, (7)              5.0       32˝  40   4
18-22  MCHESS8, (23)                    4.5       44   55˝  3
       ZARKOV4.5T, (13)                 4.5       40˝  48   3
       GROMIT 3.8.1, (26)               4.5       39   50˝  2 
Download all games of Odyssey 2001 in PGN format.

The Rebel Home Page has been visited times.
Since November 23, 1995