Author: stuart taylor
Date: 21:46:40 03/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 02, 2000 at 15:49:52, stuart taylor wrote: >On March 01, 2000 at 13:02:53, Howard Exner wrote: > >>On March 01, 2000 at 04:18:56, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>On March 01, 2000 at 01:08:12, Howard Exner wrote: >>> >>>>On February 29, 2000 at 21:51:33, stuart taylor wrote: >>>> >>>>>After careful examination, it has become clear that Rxb7 has nothing in it >>>>>except for some interesting complications nearby, good for a draw. >>>>> Hiarcs doesn't choose this move even after a long time simply because >>>>>there is nothing in it in the long term. If there was, then Hiarcs is normally >>>>>one of the first. >>>> >>>>About how long did you let Hiarcs analyse this position? >>>> >>>>If you input the move Rxb7, how does Hiarcs proceed? >>>> >>>>> So it is wishful thinking to analize a position by seeing how long it takes a >>>>>program to "find" what you fancy it to find. >>>>>S.Taylor >>> >>>Eventually I inserted Rxb7 on hiarcs 7.0 and after a good few hours it >>>acknowledged black as -88, but that seemed only to be due to the potential >>>but not actual danger black was in. He COULD have fallen into one or two >>>traps due to the bad position of his king-with possible mating nets. >>> Then I eventually pruned out the continuation with help of monitor x 3 >>>and there were no lines at all which led to anything. i.e. anything which >>>might possibly have led to anything I examined quite deeply until it was more >>>than obvious that there was not. >>> It's a very perfect method of analysis done in the right way and not leaving >>>any stone >>>unturned. >>>S.Taylor >> >>What is Hiarcs main line? >> >>Below is an analysis link of Kasparov for this game. He examines the replys Qc4, >>which is the game continuation, as well as Rhe8 and Ne4. All are leading to >>white wins according to GK and many lines are quite intricate and deep. Does >>your method using Hiarcs refute any of these? >> >>http://www.kasparovchess.com/serve/templates/folders/show.asp?p_docID=1463&p_docLang=EN > >I beleived my conclusion was well founded, but since you're pitting me against >Kasparov, I'm trying to work on it in light of that, but unfortunately I'm >very busy now planning to go away for 3 weeks. I hope to write about my >findings by end of Sunday-if I have any. It's certainly a worthy challenge >since I felt quite sure of myself before that. >Thanks. >S.Taylor After 30.R:b7!! Rh-e8 31.Rb6 Ra8 Which was hiarcs main line, he went 32.Be6 But Kasparov himself agrees that this is not the winning move, but 32.Bf1!! I had not probed this well enough, nor was hiarcs very forthcoming regarding it, taking almost 30 seconds admitting it to be +209 instead of - something, even after I played it on the board. But indeed! 32.Bf1!! Does the trick. I've checked it out deeply. I'm also wondering if it might be a forced mate after that, maybe within 16-17. But I would be very surprised if Crafty saw Bf1 when playing R:b7 after about 20 minutes. Maybe it didn't, and if not, it's no big surprise to have found R:b7. After 32.Bf7 comes ...Re1+ etc. S.Taylor
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.