Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:19:10 09/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 16, 2001 at 14:29:45, Peter Berger wrote: >On September 16, 2001 at 09:02:20, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 16, 2001 at 07:52:45, Peter Berger wrote: >> >>>3.) I suspect many programs will see the possible draw after a long search - >>>1.Qf2 should be just as good as 1.Qf1. >> >>I am not sure about it. >> >>After Qf2 black can play Ng4 and not Nxe4. >>Fisher suggested also Ng4 in the book but the difference is that >>after Qf1 Ng4 the queen does not need to move. >> >>Deep Fritz also found Qf2 but later prefered Qf1 because >>it did not like Qf2 Ng4. >> > >Let's have a look: > >1.Qf2 Ng4 > >a.) The defensive experiment: > >2.Qe1 Ne5 3.Rf4 > >Very difficult to judge - probably better for black. > >b.) The endgame experiment: > >2.Qf3 Ne5 3.Bxc3 Qxe4 4.Bxe5 Qxe5 > >Looks won for Black. > >As 1.Qf1 Nxe4 is won for White I agree that 1.Qf1 is better than 1.Qf2. > >But the major quality of Ng4 doesn't seem to be the tempo here anyway but the >much better square for the knight,so how about > >1.Qf1 Ng4 > >I wasn't able to find anything leading to a major advantage for White - looks >pretty even - I can't look at "60 memorable games" - is this line covered? Yes 19...Ng4 20.Bxc3 Qb7 21.Qf4 is the proposed line in the book. I did not analyze this line to check if 19...Ng4 is the best move. I know that Fisher had errors in his analysis later in the game(he was probably wrong to believe that 20.a3 is losing) so I do not assume that fisher is right without checking it for hours by a computer. > >I don't think it is a really good testposition - the programs get Qf1 sooner or >later but not for the right reason ( look at Yace's eval - just like Fritz). At least they can see positive evaluation of 0.03 so they believe that Qf1 is better for white. 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.