Author: Sune Larsson
Date: 04:25:53 07/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2001 at 07:06:40, Mark Young wrote: >You should not post positions as "Testposition" when there are more then one way >to solve the position in a winning way, this is not the first example I have >found of the positions you have posted, but since I can prove to you with GM >anaylsis on this one, it was time. Thanks for your remark. I didn't know about Kramnik's comments to this game. Very interesting. Then again, there are many ways of "testing a position". If a GM shows a winning continuation in a game - and some computer program displays another line, as convincing or even more, I find that very interesting also, don't you? Mark well, in this specific case I never wrote anything about 24.Bxa6 being *the only* move in this position. For me it feels vital to test different program's evaluations after Kramnik's 24.Bxa6. The compensation for the piece is to be found in my comments but do the programs have this knowledge? If not, what could be done do add it? Sune
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.