Author: Melvin S. Schwartz
Date: 16:52:15 03/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 06, 2000 at 16:52:31, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On March 06, 2000 at 16:28:03, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >>Hello Dann, >> >>That does surprise me. I don't know if you saw my original post stating that >>Fritz 5.32, Hiarcs 7.32, and CSTal 2.03 all liked Bh2+. CM7000 and Rebel 10 >>liked Bxb2+. Rebel-Tiger likes Bf4+. Personally, I see the danger of the rook at >>g1 to be more important than Bxb2+ and going after the rook at a1. What is very >>interesting is Rebel-Tiger's choice of Bf4+ with the intention of taking White's >>Bishop at h6. This is a very interesting choice which still leaves the rook I >>was concerned about at g1 active. However, Tiger seems to be able to hold the >>line. I also wonder if Tiger is the only program to actually play Bf4+? >> >>Mel > >I'm by no means a chess wizard, but Bf4+ looks fine to me. Later on the knight >will be well placed a f4 controlling e2 and the rook on g1 won't be able to >prevent blacks pieces in crowding the king. The choice of Bxb2+ is strictly >material I think. Bh2+ is winning, but Bf4+ might turn out to be a more pleasing >choice. Hello Mogens, If you saw my original post then you would know I played Bh2+ in the game. Bf4+ was my first thought but I was very concerned about that rook at g1 and so went with what I felt was the better choice of Bh2+. I agree with you that Bxb2+ appears to be materialistic. I have not said there was anything wrong with Bf4+ for Tiger seems to hold with that move, but I was wondering if any other program played Bf4+ or if someone had a solid refutation to that move? Regards, Mel > >Best wishes... >Mogens
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.