Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 16:25:49 09/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 24, 2000 at 17:09:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On September 24, 2000 at 16:06:57, Dan Ellwein wrote: > >>On September 24, 2000 at 10:42:01, Harald Faber wrote: >> >>>I'd suggest 30mins. >>> >>>[D]rnbqr1k1/pp2bppp/4p3/2ppP3/3P3P/2NB1N2/PPP2PP1/R2QK2R w KQ - bm Bd3h7;id >>>Faber-Lautenschuetz; >> >>Harold >> >>Can you give the move sequence after Bxh7... > >It's very deep to see, basically you need to start with > >Bxh7 kxh7 ng5 bxg5 hxg5 kg8 qh5 kf8 g6 ke7 gf rf8 dxc5 > >And only then diep starts seeing the problems getting a draw score >at ply=9, and desperately playing Na6 in the end with a near to >draw score, most likely failing low the ply after it. >g7 goes away f7 goes away, >sacrafices on d5 in all mainlines, and after long castling white plays with >some pieces more, but before you see those effectively penetrate the position >you're another 10 ply further. After the above sequence i still have >a draw score for Qa5 at ply==11, it's hard to blame evaluation, but that's >only way to find this combination. Basically you need to get an optimistic >score for white as the root position is optimistically evaluated for >white. So black needs to see big troubles before it will consider playing >Bxh7. 20 plies or so? Mine plays this within a few seconds and it gets as far as ... Ke7 with an approximately even score. So it's "solving" this with eval. If you play your whole like out it's still hard to see the win. I get O-O-O after that and some fiddling around with a plus score but no concrete win. bruce
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.