Author: fca
Date: 14:36:42 07/14/98
The reference is: http://www.rebel.nl/rebel10a.htm#ANTI-GM First may I say I am excited about anti-GM, and very positive about the four follow-up examples given of its operation. It looks like a real advance! I will certainly buy R10, but that is not so strange as I bought R8 and R9 (and many other programs) too... But the original / basal example troubles me a lot: I have told Ed of this, but as the example stays on the site I must consider that I may have missed something. In the example, the move is 1. Rxe6 (selected quickly by anti-GM). If 1. Rxe6 is _not_ played, IMO the position is -= . Black has a pawn, but White has some compensation. Probable outcome: draw. Now it is not difficult IMO to show that now 1... fxe6 wins for Black. There are some mates to avoid, but otherwise _natural_ play by Black seems to result in a comfortable win. Not hard to find the winning play (I did). But it is likely that a GM sees more dangers than I. Now what I have already written does not in itself mean that anti-GM has selected a bad move, for if a GM etc. would not select 1... fxe6 (say time was quite limited, and GM got scared) then anti-GM would have worked! I believe Amir's opinion (please excuse if I've been misadvised) was that "they" may not select 1... fxe6 in such circumstances (short time). I disagree. I think there are no sensible alternatives to 1... fxe6, so the sacrifice must be accepted. Here is some manual analysis (interesting to see if programs agree) to support my view. The reason I did the analysis by hand is simply that I do not have a cc here: but I suppose it is relevant because we are looking at what a human Black would play. (A computer black obvioulsy grabs the Rook, and wins). 1. Rx6 0-0 2. Bh6 exf6 3. Nxe6 forking Q & R leaves White at least += - but there may well be something _even_ better for White (as per Alekhine, the makings of a combination are here) 1. Rxe6 0-0 2. Bh6 Re8? (if the Rook-capture fear still persists) 3. Bxd7 fxe6 (3... Qxd7 4. Rxg6+ 1-0 ) 4. Qxe6+ Bf8 (4... Rg8 5. Nxe6 +- ) and after the (big) simplification White stays a pawn up, maybe with a better position +- 1. Rxe6 Rxc1+?! 2. Rxc1 exf6 (best, why now if not earlier? 2...Nxf4? 3. Rxe7+ +- ) Nxe6 Qb8 Nxc7+ +- as the knight is poisoned, and a King escape to f-land will leave White well ahead in material So... what is left? 1. Rxe6 Rc7 but surely not? How boring! At best, Black has lost all of his advantage (I think White is *tactically* winning here, but the problem is too hard for me!). Would a GM actually choose ..Rc7 ? White's threat is still in place... he has not removed anything. Pins... soon. more pins, Rook doubling on e-, etc. Would a human GM care to have Black here? Please refute, comment, elucidate, show what else Black could play instead of 1...exf6, or whatever! Anyone please? In the absence of refutation etc. I would otherwise assume the example shows anti-GM unnecessarily making a move which is not hard to refute. Repl Kind regards fca PS: Of course, the website may have the second purpose of over-relaxing Anand! :-)
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.