Author: blass uri
Date: 09:09:40 04/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2000 at 11:39:51, Laurence Chen wrote: >On April 22, 2000 at 11:26:16, Laurence Chen wrote: > >>On April 22, 2000 at 10:51:27, Pierre Bourget wrote: >> >>>Is it true in this position that Hiarcs play Qf7+ ?? because of the tablebase ? >>>Isn't it a little ridiculous.Look here for Tim Krabbe opinion: >>> >>>http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess2/diary.htm >>> >>>[D]5k2/2Q5/8/8/5p2/5P2/5P2/K7 w - - 0 1 >>What's your point then? I do this type of move against a human player, there >>reason why I do such thing is that the human player is too stubborn to resign, >>hence, he is asking for humiliation, and wants to take a long beating. So why >>not!!!! I find playing against this type of position against a human player who >>does not want to resign in a totally hopeless position, then he deserves to be >>torture to a slow death. I approve Hiarcs move, it still mates the opponent in >>25 moves. A mate is a mate no matter how many moves. A win is a win. >>Laurence >I think you are both wrong and too hash to judge that Hiarcs 7.32 cannot play >chess. What if this was the 50th move for White? How many of you would not play >the move 50. Qf7+, any other move would lead to the 50th move draw. No 50.Qxf4+ is also winning and 50.Qf7+ can be a drawn by the 50 move rule if there were 99 moves without a capture and without another move when 50.Qxf4+ is always winning. Uri
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.