Author: Uri Blass
Date: 00:30:15 09/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 13, 2001 at 03:15:31, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On September 13, 2001 at 00:29:17, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On September 13, 2001 at 00:00:02, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>All you are doing is considering the root position solved, and allowing any move >>>that does anything, which is ridiculous. >>> >>>The key move trades down to an obviously won ending. The other moves let you >>>stay up a piece, without clarifying anything. >>> >>>My program analyzes Rg5+ was +3, without taking any material off the board. Rb6 >>>is +4, according to it. >>> >>>This one seems semi-positional, but if Crafty is going to live by positional >>>solutions, it needs to die by them as well. >> >>I would be very interested to see what your program says upon analyzing this >>position overnight. >> >>I think it is a won ending (Rg5+) but I do have terrible intuition. I also >>intend to study it carefully. > >If the point of Rg5+ is to trade pawns, this doesn't seem like a very good >solution. The solution where you've got a king, knight, and pawns, versus king >and some pawns, is pretty hard to beat. > >bruce I believe that Rg5+ wins a pawn if you search deep enough. A possible line is 1.Rg5+ b5 2.axb5 axb5 3.Rg8 c3 4.Nd3 Rc4 5.Rg6 Ra4+ 6.Kb3 Ra1 7.Rd6 when black cannot protece d4. The point of Rg5+ is to win material without trading c2 and not to trade pawns. I still prefer 1.Rb6 because rb6 wins also the same material. Uri
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.