Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 05:57:38 11/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2000 at 07:46:31, Thorsten Czub wrote: >[D]2rr2k1/1p1b2p1/p3p2n/2Bp3B/1P3P1Q/PP5R/1q5P/4R2K b > >Lets see what other programs think about move 39... > >CSTal2.03: d8 88" +1.16 Qg5 b6 Bxb6 Rf8 Bc5 Rf6 Bg6 Qxa3 >Shredder4: d11/23 1'23" +1.07 Qe7 e5 Rh4 d4 fxe5 Qc3 ... >Gandalf4: d9 ~ 1' +0.86 Bg6 e5 Rg3 Qd2 Rxe5 Qc1+ Kg2 >Hiarcs7.32: d9/27 1'11" +1.84 Qe7 e5 Rg3 exf4 Rg2 >Fritz6: d11/34 1'44" +0.72 Qe7 e5 Rh4 d4 Qxe5 Bc6... >Junior6: d16 1'39" +1.06 Qe7 >CMaster6000:d3/8 1'46" +0.71 Qg5 Qd2 Qe5 Rc6 Bg6 > >Why do you believe black is NOT lost here ?! >IMO the position is very clear. black is shortly before execution. Because the position used by Bob is after Kh1 (see diagram), while your analysis is before. >>Is black blind? Is white over-optimistic? > >the truth is IMO that white missed the right way to excute black. >the position is lost for black IMO. That is true. >Crafty's misevaluation is the problem it came into the position. >and gambit-tigers , as you call it, inflated evaluation is the reason >it played such an attack. And the reason why Gambit Tiger couldn't execute the attack was also misevaluation. The argument that it found the right move later is irrelevant, because the same can be argued on behalf of Crafty using a previous move I imagine. >I want to explain why i believe this game is a good example. Your explanation is utter nonsense as usual. The truth is that GT had a winning attack, blundered and got lucky in the end when Crafty played Ne8. This happens in numerous computer chess games without any of them belonging to a new paradigm. Mogens.
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.