Author: Francesco Di Tolla
Date: 00:17:54 11/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 19, 2003 at 14:59:23, Drexel,Michael wrote: >On November 19, 2003 at 06:42:01, Francesco Di Tolla wrote: > >>> >>>9...cxb5 is just awful and completely losing. >> >>could you support yuor statement with some further argument? > >10.Bxb5 exd4 (e4 11.Ne5 Be7 12.Ba3 +-) 11. exd4 Be7 12. O-O O-O 13. Bf4 +- [D] r1bq1rk1/1p1nbppp/5n2/pBPp4/Q2P1B2/2N2N2/P4PPP/R4RK1 b - - 0 13 > >b7,d5 pawns and b6,b5 squares are very weak. Now I see your mistake: you follow the evaluation of an engine in a position where every body said the engines have little understanding. The line you propose is fine, but after 13...Nb8 with the idea of Bd7 and Nc6 the position is only slightly better for white but open to a a dynamic play, so Fritz could find a way to defend. A much better situation then that of the game where the engine could not see that after Qc7 the the a5 pawn was doomed and hence the engine evaluets the position as still almost equal and avoids this line, but seeing that a5 will fall this line is less evil imho. After Qc7 taking in b5 is still possible but with Nxb5 you waste a tempo with the queen. By the way I guess Nxb5 with the idea of Bf4 and Nd6 is probably better then the line computer suggest. regards Franz
This page took 0 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.