Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:18:58 12/15/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 15, 1998 at 22:08:20, Dann Corbit wrote: >After ten minutes Crafty still likes Rxe7, but does not see the same line as was >actually played out. It seems fairly obvious now, that the best defense was to >simply ignore the offer. So this one was a real sucker punch. > >12-> 10:23 1.16 1. Rxe7+ Kd8 2. Rxd7+ Kc8 3. Rd8+ Kxd8 > 4. Bf5+ Qxd1+ 5. Qxd1+ Nd4 6. Bh3 Be4 > 7. cxd4 Ba5 8. Be7+ Ke8 9. Qa4+ c6 > 10. g3 Rb1+ 11. Bf1 Bb6 > >For the second game, the queen sacrifice was seen instantly. So an auxilliary >question is, how far back can we take it in the sequence and still see the mate? > Even though it is not very deep, this would have to be regarded as a true and >irrefutable sacrifice, would it not? > > 2 0.00 Mat02 1. Qf6+ Nxf6 2. Be7# > 2-> 0.01 Mat02 1. Qf6+ Nxf6 2. Be7# > time=0.01 cpu=100% mat=-12 n=771 fh=81% nps=10000 > ext-> checks=40 recaps=4 pawns=0 1rep=11 > predicted=0 nodes=771 evals=259 > endgame tablebase-> probes done=0 successful=0 No.. wrong term. "combination" is what you are looking for. "sacrifice" usually means offering something where you get nothing *tangible* back. IE sacrifice the exchange to get pressure in the center that may or may not win later on. The above is not a sac, because you get more back than you invest, ie you give up the queen, but win the game...
This page took 0.05 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.