Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 02:28:05 10/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 2000 at 05:06:27, Uri Blass wrote: >I disagree. >Kasparov defended the position like a good bean counter. >I believe that kasparov played g5 because his evaluation of the position was >wrong. >I believe that g5 is losing but I am not sure about it(the only clear thing is >that white has a clear advantage after g5). > >Uri The 4th and the 6th game have been both better for white. If Kramnik would have played the right moves (better evaluation-function) black would have lost both games. In both games it was not the DEFENSE of Kasparov that was the reason for the draw, but the WEAKNESS of Kramnik to win a won position. Kasparpv played weak. in both games. the only lucky thing was: kramnik played weaker. people in this forum do as if kasparov has done something brilliant, when in fact he was unable to do anything against kramnik attacking. if kramnik would not have made those wrong moves, he would have won both games. i am sure other players - playing for white - would not have drawn those 2 games against kasparov. in both games both humans have played many unaccurate moves, to list them up and to analyse them would need a special forum, so many moves can be critisized. This is human-chess. it is unperfect. analysing it is wasting time. you can follow it, be happy, surprised and highly emotionalized about it, but ANALYSE it ? no - this makes no sense at all. you only get disapointed the longer you replay the games, for all those moves that have been wrong, and missed chances that have been played.
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.