Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 02:08:48 11/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 2003 at 03:23:06, Francesco Di Tolla wrote: >On November 20, 2003 at 05:14:15, Drexel,Michael wrote: >>>Now I see your mistake: you follow the evaluation of an engine in a position >>>where every body said the engines have little understanding. >> >>My mistake? Quit joking >>This is _not_ the position where everybody said that engines have little >>understanding. This is an open position where engines have a _lot_ >>understanding. > >No you compare the evaluation of the computer in two positions: in one of the >two, the closed one, the computer gives a better evaluation becaus it does not >understand the position, trusting this is the mistake. Interesting, how do you know? Any GM will tell you this position (after Re1) is +-. The problem is that _you_ do not understand how bad this position really is. You said black can play Bd7 followed by Nc6. This is obviously wrong. It fails tactically. Show me how you want to proceed after Re1. > >Black could admit to be worse and take the pawn: tha was my statement. Cause >what follows from not taking is even worse. No, this is clearly wrong from an objective point of view. The position after 10...e4 11.Nd2 is clearly better for black compared to this mess. > >>Of course I looked at 13...Nb8 14.Rfe1 +- > >agai I see you trust very much the computer! > >>White has a huge advantage in development in an open position, Black >>a horrible pawn structure. >>Your evaluation is wrong. The position is not just slightly better for white. >>It's hopeless for Black. > >I simply don't think so: I think Fritz has much more pratical chances in this >position than in the line it played. A Computer does not know about practical chances. How should he? Michael
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.