Author: Ferdinand S. Mosca
Date: 04:11:47 12/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 21, 2000 at 02:03:12, Jim Monaghan wrote: >[D]r1b3k1/pp1n3p/2pbpq1r/3p4/2PPp1p1/PP2P1P1/1BQN1P1P/3RRBK1 b - - 0 17 > >Maroczy-Tartakower, 1922 bm 17...Rxh2!! >A human GM would consider this first and only if it didn't >work would alternatives be examined. The engines don't even >consider it briefly in their candidates ... Interesting. Not that >difficult to "see", tough to verify though ... > >Crafty 17.14 >12-> 8:12 -0.47 1. ... Qf5 2. Bg2 Rf6 3. Re2 e5 4. > Nf1 exd4 5. exd4 b6 6. cxd5 cxd5 7. > Ne3 Qh5 <HT> > >LG2000v2.9a > >12 58 34388 51749022 f6f5 f1g2 d6e7 e1e2 h6f6 g1h1 f6f7 a3a4 b7b6 c4d5 c6d5 > > >This position has probably been posted before. Sorry in advance if it was:-) >Anybody's program see this? > >Jim I think the move 17...Rxh2 is still premature. The bishop on c8, the rook in a8 and the knight in d7 have to be improved first. one variation is: 1...Rxh2?! 2.Kxh2 Qxf2+ 3.Kh1 Qxg3 4.Re2 and black cannot sustain his attack, its undeveloped pieces can not easily support a pawn storm on white's king position. Besides by eliminating white's pawns in f, g and h, black's king position is also in trouble because of white's rooks that is not difficult to develop. Dinan
This page took 0.01 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.