Author: Peter Berger
Date: 14:25:20 11/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 07, 2000 at 16:26:24, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 07, 2000 at 09:03:24, Mogens Larsen wrote: > >>On November 07, 2000 at 07:48:19, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>[D]3rr1k1/1bq1b1p1/pp1ppnnp/2p5/2P1P3/1PNBBN1P/P2Q1PP1/R2R2K1 w - - 0 1 >>>This position is from the ssdf games >>>The target is to avoid Bxh6. >>> >>>The program that are called "bean counters" have no problem to solve it and >>>never consider Bxh6 as best. >> >>I tried a "bean counter". >> >>Analysis by LG2000 v2.9a: >> >>1.a3 Ne5 2.Nxe5 dxe5 >> ² (0.33) Depth: 6 00:00:00 4kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Rab1 Nde5 >> ² (0.26) Depth: 6 00:00:00 4kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Rab1 Nde5 >> ² (0.26) Depth: 7 00:00:00 23kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Qc2 Bf6 3.Rac1 >> ² (0.26) Depth: 7 00:00:00 23kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Qc2 Bf6 3.Rac1 >> ² (0.26) Depth: 8 00:00:00 304kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Rab1 Bf6 3.Rbc1 Rf8 >> = (0.20) Depth: 8 00:00:01 304kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Rab1 Bf6 3.Rbc1 Rf8 >> = (0.20) Depth: 9 00:00:01 1047kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Rab1 Bf6 3.Rbc1 Nde5 4.Nxe5 Nxe5 >> = (0.17) Depth: 9 00:00:02 1047kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Rab1 Bf6 3.Rbc1 Nde5 4.Nxe5 Nxe5 >> = (0.17) Depth: 10 00:00:06 5132kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Rab1 Rf8 3.Bc2 Bf6 4.Kh1 Nde5 >> = (0.15) Depth: 10 00:00:07 5132kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Rab1 Rf8 3.Bc2 Bf6 4.Kh1 Nde5 >> = (0.15) Depth: 11 00:00:24 23456kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Ne1 Bf6 3.f4 Ndf8 4.Rac1 Qf7 >> = (0.22) Depth: 11 00:00:32 23456kN >>1.a3 Nd7 2.Ne1 Bf6 3.f4 Ndf8 4.Rac1 Qf7 >> = (0.22) Depth: 12 00:00:49 47137kN >>1.Bxh6 >> = (0.23) Depth: 12 00:01:15 47137kN >>1.Bxh6 gxh6 2.Qxh6 Nf8 3.e5 Bxf3 4.gxf3 N6h7 5.Kh1 Bg5 6.Rg1 Qf7 7.Rxg5+ Nxg5 >>8.Qxg5+ Qg7 >> = (0.22) Depth: 12 00:03:29 47137kN >>1.Bxh6 gxh6 2.Qxh6 Nf8 3.e5 Bxf3 4.gxf3 N6h7 5.Kh1 Bg5 6.Rg1 Qf7 7.Rxg5+ Nxg5 >>8.Qxg5+ Qg7 >> = (0.22) Depth: 13 00:04:09 291559kN >>1.Bxh6 gxh6 2.Qxh6 Nf8 3.e5 Bxf3 4.gxf3 N6h7 5.Kh1 Bg5 6.Rg1 Qf7 7.Rxg5+ Nxg5 >>8.Qxg5+ Qg7 9.Qh5 >> ² (0.51) Depth: 13 00:07:42 291559kN >>1.Bxh6 gxh6 2.Qxh6 Nf8 3.e5 Bxf3 4.gxf3 N6h7 5.Kh1 Bg5 6.Rg1 Qf7 7.Rxg5+ Nxg5 >>8.Qxg5+ Qg7 9.Qh5 >> ² (0.51) Depth: 14 00:07:54 577857kN >> >>Best wishes... >>Mogens > >LG2000 wants to play 3.e5 and not 3.Ng5 of gandalf. > >I see that gandlf after more than 10.5 hours at depth 15 has also 3.e5 in the >main line and the score dropped to 0.25 pawns for white so it started to >understand that 1.Bxh6 is not so good. > >It got this main line after 5 hours 24 minutes abd 1 second. > >Gandalf expects 1.Bxh6 gxh6 2.Qxh6 Nf8 3.e5 N6h7 4.Kh1 Kh8 5.Be4 dxe5. > >4.Kh1 is strange in this line because 4.Bxh7+ wins a pawn but gandalf does not >want to trade the bishop for some reason. > >Uri I really appreciate people posting _difficult_ positions which tell something about the different views of the engines ! Evaluating Bxh6 highly is indeed risky and it is very interesting to watch the thought process with different engines . This one might end up in something highly positional though . Let's play a few more moves : 1. Bxh6 gh 2. Qxh6 Nf8 3. e5 N6h7 4. Bxh7 + Nxh7 5. Qxe6+ Kh8 6. Nd5 Qd7 7. Qxd7 Rxd7 8. e6 Rdd8 9. Rd3 Bxd5 10. cd Rg8 11. Kh2 Plausible moves yet extremely difficult to reach a meaningful judgement of the resulting position , don't you think ? It seems no chessprogram will go exactly for this line as white and it would help to be a little better a chessplayer here :-) ; but it seems to me white isn't doing so bad at all . Could you post the Gandalf game you observed ? Greetings. pete
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.