Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:37:24 04/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2000 at 12:23:08, Ed Schröder wrote: >On April 16, 2000 at 12:10:41, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >>I think Rebel performed a really great show. After examination the game appears >>fullo of tricks and traps -positionally kind- that very easily could put in the >>wrong path more than a kown top chess program in SSDF list. My congrats for Ed, >>that clearly seems to have "pasted" some of the holes in the tactical arena of >>Rebel. >>Fernando > >Thank you Fernando. I was quite nervous during the ending when I saw >the white king moving to the queen side to hunt for the two weak >black pawns on c6 and a6 leaving its own king undevelopped. But the >wall Rebel created with Nb7 did the trick and according Smyslov himself >there was no win. Well.. during the game I was not convinced of that as >the Smyslov position looked real promising. But these monsters are tough >defenders (most of the time). When I saw Rebel showing senseless moves >in its main-variation (Bg7 / Bh8 / Bg7) I relaxed as this was a sign >for me there was no progress for white. I am very happy with the draw. > >Not to speak about the Israel League, so far 4½ out of 5. What is there >left to wish? Nothing... > >Ed I thought you defended as well as anyone/anything could. The only thing I didn't like was to see Rebel exchange into what was almost certainly a lost ending (white with a queenside majority, black king on the other side of the board.) Hard to say if it was really lost or not, as Smyslov made more than one move that Crafty thought was wrong. Of course Crafty could have been wrong instead, so that is not conclusive. But clearly there was no way for white to lose, and no way for black to win, so why go for such a pawn structure??? IE defending great is nice, but I would rather be working hard for a win, with a possible draw option, rather than working hard for a draw, with a very possible loss option... What caused Rebel to go for that setup in the first place? IE this is why I have been fiddling with the pawn majority / candidate passed pawn code for so long now... If you get that position vs a GM in blitz, you almost certainly lose it. And if you let them get it, they will, over and over. There are way too many different examples of that 3 vs 2 queenside where white wins trivially, to take a chance on reaching it, IMHO. And if you get tricked into reaching it, keeping heavy pieces on the board is the right answer. Trading helps the majority side...
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.