Author: Günter Müller
Date: 07:11:14 09/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 07, 2001 at 17:58:19, Slater Wold wrote:
>On September 07, 2001 at 17:19:07, José Carlos wrote:
>
>> Last night, in one of my test games, Averno played ...Bxf4 in this position
>>(against another program):
>>
>>[D]4R3/p2r3r/1pNbRp2/2p2k1p/2P2PpP/PP4P1/K7/8 b - - 0 1
>>
>> The game ended soon:
>>
>>57. gxf4 g3 58. Re2 Rhg7 59. Re1 g2 60. Rg1 Rd2+ 61. Ka1 Rf2
>>62. Ree1 Kxf4 63. a4 Kg3 64. a5 Rc7 65. Nd8 bxa5 66. Kb1 Kxh4 67. Ka1 Kg3
>>68. Kb1 h4 69. Ne6 Rc6 70. Nd8 Rb6 71. Ne6 Rxb3+
>>{White resigns} 0-1
>>
>> 59. Re1 is a blunder, but I wonder if the sac is correct at all. It seems that
>>59. Rg2 is good enough for white (Averno plays Bxf4 by eval, it doesn't see the
>>pawn queening at all in search). Is my passed pawn eval too high here? What do
>>other programs think?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> José C.
>
>I believe it's an sound sac, and Shredder 5.32 agrees:
>
>w,s - Shredder 5.32
>4R3/p2r3r/1pNbRp2/2p2k1p/2P2PpP/PP4P1/K7/8 b - - 0 1
>
>Analysis by Shredder 5.32:
>
>1...Bxf4 2.gxf4 g3 3.Re1 g2 4.Kb2 Rhg7 5.Rg1 Rd2+ 6.Kc3 Rf2 7.Rg8 Rxg8 8.Ne7+
> = (-0.01)??? Depth: 14/26 00:01:02 24150kN
>
>(w, 07.09.2001)
>
>
>Slate
Hi Slate
Analysis by Shredder 5.32 with = (-0.01) is a mistake!
If Shredder 5.32 go step by step his result you can see it
56... Bxf4 {0.00/11 3} 57. gxf4 g3 58. Re1 g2 59. Kb2 Rhg7 60. Rg1 Rd2+ 61. Kc3
Rf2 62.Rg8 ?? (62. Ne7+ ! {-1.87/14 195})
62... Rxg8 63. Ne7+ Kxf4 {-5.06/17 41}
MfG
Günter
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.