Author: martin fierz
Date: 07:13:03 05/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2004 at 09:04:55, Sune Fischer wrote: >On May 10, 2004 at 08:48:34, martin fierz wrote: > >>On May 10, 2004 at 08:11:34, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>On May 10, 2004 at 07:33:38, martin fierz wrote: >>> >>>>there are instances where pushing pawns in front of your king is ok. there are >>>>others where it's not ok. they are rather easy to distinguish most of the time >>>>(some simple rules are sufficient for this) and i'm surprised that you don't >>>>understand that it's not such a great idea here... >>> >>>Rules of thumb are good but not great, there are always exceptions and computers >>>are experts at finding them. It is possible that all other moves simply lose >>>faster. >> >>if you read the entire thread you would see the issue is not the move ...g5 at >>all. as has been said before, but you obviously didn't read, kasparov himself >>said that ...g5 was necessary to keep black in the game. >>the point i was trying to make is that if black has to resort to such moves, it >>is clear he did something wrong *before*. > >I did read the entire thread, except the post you made about the same time as >me, and the talk has been about whether g5 was good or bad. Just read what you >wrote "and i'm surprised that you don't understand that it's not such a great >idea here..." (meaning the move g5 should have been avoided). not at all - the move g5 being pretty much forced here just means that previous moves leading to g5 being forced should have been avoided. >I don't think it is irrelevant, I don't see why Uri or me should trust some GM >analysis made on the fly, during a live TV transmission when GMs can't even get >it right in the analysis they publish in books. because these are concrete variations which can have holes in them. the general assessment of the position can be right all the same. you can, at the same time, be able to i) realize that ...g5 has weakened black's kingside a lot and ii) be totally unable to punish the machine for that because you're not good enough at chess. ii) does not invalidate i). so i'm saying you should not trust the variations the GMs are giving 100%, but you should trust their general feeling as to whether a position is good or not. >The g5 move was the one refered to as a "blunder" (read the thread please:). >I do agree some of the others look more suspicious :) i think not only ...g5 was referred to as blunder, but i'm too lazy to read the thread now :-) >It makes a difference as to whether it is a blunder or not. >It may look ugly, but if it is forced by tactics then it's not a blunder per se. right, but it should be clear by now that it's pretty much forced... cheers martin
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.