Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 10:36:05 09/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
[D]2r1r1k1/pp1nbpp1/4pn1p/q3NN1P/P1pP1B2/2P5/1PQ2PP1/R3R1K1 w - - bm Nxg7; id "ECM.1227"; >>I think Bringer's solution here is even prettier than the original one ;-) Nxg7 is hell better. DIEP needs 3 minutes to fail high and PV under 4 minutes: 00:00 0 0 7 (0) 1 0.446 Nf5xe7 Re8xe7 00:00 0 0 123 (0) 1 0.495 b2-b4 00:00 0 0 529 (0) 2 -0.329 b2-b4 c4xb3 Nf5xe7 Re8xe7 ++ f5-e7 00:00 0 0 537 (0) 2 0.446 Nf5xe7 Re8xe7 00:00 0 0 1608 (71) 3 0.218 Nf5xe7 Re8xe7 Qc2-d1 Nd7xe5 Re1xe5 ++ e5-d7 00:00 0 0 4316 (1544) 3 0.499 Ne5xd7 Qa5xf5 Qc2xf5 e6xf5 00:00 0 0 6804 (1544) 4 0.237 Ne5xd7 Nf6xd7 Nf5xe7 Re8xe7 ++ f5-e7 00:00 0 0 9253 (1544) 4 0.302 Nf5xe7 Re8xe7 Ne5xd7 Nf6xd7 Qc2-e2 ++ f5-h6 00:00 0 0 13538 (2130) 4 1.077 Nf5xh6 g7xh6 Ne5xf7 Nd7-f8 Nf7xh6 Kg8-g7 00:00 0 0 35174 (2284) 5 0.725 Nf5xh6 g7xh6 Ne5xf7 Qa5xh5 Nf7xh6 Kg8-h8 Re1xe6 B e7-f8 Re6xe8 Rc8xe8 00:00 0 0 48650 (2328) 6 0.725 Nf5xh6 g7xh6 Ne5xf7 Qa5xh5 Nf7xh6 Kg8-h8 Re1xe6 B e7-f8 Re6xe8 Rc8xe8 00:02 0 0 200812 (47985) 7 0.786 Nf5xh6 g7xh6 Ne5xf7 Nf6xh5 b2-b4 c4xb3 Qc2-g6 N h5-g7 Bf4xh6 00:06 0 0 651032 (122343) 8 0.553 Nf5xh6 g7xh6 Ne5xf7 Qa5xh5 Nf7xh6 Kg8-h8 Re1xe 6 Be7-f8 Re6xe8 Rc8xe8 Nh6-f5 Re8-e2 00:11 0 0 1260696 (128407) 9 0.553 Nf5xh6 g7xh6 Ne5xf7 Qa5xh5 Nf7xh6 Kg8-h8 Re1x e6 Be7-f8 Re6xe8 Rc8xe8 Nh6-f5 Re8-e2 00:26 0 0 3053529 (243713) 10 0.553 Nf5xh6 g7xh6 Ne5xf7 Qa5xh5 Nf7xh6 Kg8-h8 Re1 xe6 Be7-f8 Re6xe8 Rc8xe8 Nh6-f5 Re8-e2 01:21 0 0 9647965 (696416) 11 0.110 Nf5xh6 g7xh6 Ne5xf7 Qa5xh5 Nf7xh6 Kg8-h8 Re1 -e3 Nf6-d5 Re3-h3 Qh5xh3 Qc2-g6 Qh3xg2 Qg6xg2 Nd5xf4 Qg2xb7 ++ f5-g7 03:48 0 0 26478713 (3585027) 11 0.877 Nf5xg7 Kg8xg7 Bf4xh6 Kg7-g8 Re1-e3 Nd7xe5 d4xe5 Nf6xh5 Qc2-e4 Nh5-g7 Re3-g3 Be7-f8 Ra1-e1 Qa5xa4 Qe4-g4 Qa4-c2 Bh6xg7 Qc2- f5 Qg4xf5 e6xf5 Bg7-h6 Kg8-h7 04:21 0 0 30322917 (3874495) 12 0.877 Nf5xg7 Kg8xg7 Bf4xh6 Kg7-g8 Re1-e3 Nd7xe5 d4xe5 Nf6xh5 Qc2-e4 Nh5-g7 Re3-g3 Be7-f8 Ra1-e1 Qa5xa4 Qe4-g4 Qa4-c2 Bh6xg7 Qc2- f5 Qg4xf5 e6xf5 06:23 0 0 44889293 (5149494) 13 0.877 Nf5xg7 Kg8xg7 Bf4xh6 Kg7-g8 Re1-e3 Nd7xe5 d4xe5 Nf6xh5 Qc2-e4 Nh5-g7 Re3-g3 Be7-f8 Ra1-e1 Qa5xa4 Qe4-g4 Qa4-c2 Bh6xg7 Qc2- f5 Qg4xf5 >>0:00:44.1 (13/40) 12455642 0.00 1.Nxd7 Nxd7 2.Rxe6 >>Both lead to a forced draw as far as I can see - or is there some hidden win >>after Nxg7 ? > >This position isn't found by Crafty either. Crafty considers Nxd7 for a while >but after that switches to Nxe7. In another post this position this position is >called for sure won by white. So yes there must be a hidden win. Deep Fritz says >Nxg7 with a score of +1.09 afer 1 hour analyzing. > >>[D]rnb2rk1/pp2bppp/2p5/q7/4NN2/4B1QP/PPP3P1/2KR3R w - - bm Rd5; id "ECM.1259"; >> >>This one looks wrong but this has been discussed before. > >Correct >> >>0:00:00.5 ( 7/16) 124311 -0.59 1.Bd4 f6 2.Kb1 Qb5 3.Nc3 Qc4 >>(Mat=-105,50=4) >>0:00:00.8 ( 7/20) 198362 -0.58 1.Nd5 (Mat=-105,50=1) >>0:00:00.9 ( 7/20) 221167 -0.23 1.Nd5 cxd5 2.Bh6 g6 3.Qe5 (Mat=-440,50=1) >>0:00:01.6 ( 8/22) 350411 0.17 1.Nd5 (Mat=-105,50=1) >>0:00:01.9 ( 8/22) 482997 0.57 1.Nd5 (Mat=-105,50=1) >>0:00:03.4 ( 8/30) 875358 1.45 1.Nd5 Bh4 2.Nef6+ Bxf6 3.Nxf6+ Kh8 4.Qd6 >>Nd7 5.Nxd7 (Mat=235,50=0) >>0:00:05.3 ( 9/30) 1378602 1.46 1.Nd5 Bh4 2.Nef6+ Bxf6 3.Nxf6+ Kh8 4.Qd6 >>Nd7 >>0:00:08.8 (10/30) 2302704 1.06 1.Nd5 Bh4 (Mat=-105,50=2) >>0:00:11.5 (10/30) 2916154 1.06 1.Nd5 Bh4 2.Nef6+ (Mat=-105,50=3) >>0:00:25.7 (11/34) 7039167 1.46 1.Nd5 (Mat=-105,50=1) >>0:00:39.8 (11/34) 11031090 1.86 1.Nd5 (Mat=-105,50=1) >> >>[D]2kr2r1/2pqbp1p/p1n1b3/1P1pP3/4n3/1BP1BN2/1P4PP/RN1Q1RK1 b - - bm Bh3; id >>"ECM.1426"; >> >>Unclear. >> >>0:00:48.6 (11/29) 12622358 -0.45 1...axb5 2.Qd3 Bh3 3.Ra8+ Nb8 4.Ne1 Be6 >>5.Nd2 f5 6.exf6 Nxf6 7.Ra7 (Mat=0,50=1) > >12-> 4:30 0.00 1. ... Bh3 2. Ne1 Bxg2 3. Nxg2 Rxg2+ 4. Kxg2 Rg8+ 5. Kh1 >Ng3+ 6. Kg2 Ne4+ >> >>Der Bringer obviously doesn't understand this completely but the axb5 idea >>_followed_ by Bh3 seems to be just as good as the immediate Bh3. >>Analysis with chessprograms always led to a quick 0.00 in either case. 1...Bh3 >>is the principle move, but is it the only one ? >> >>[D]2r2rk1/pp2pp1p/2np2p1/q4P2/2PBP1b1/2N5/PP1Q2PP/R4RK1 w - - bm h3; id >>"ECM.1527"; >> >>It seems 1.Qh6 is just as good as 1.h3 . >> >>0:00:00.8 ( 8/16) 215876 0.15 1.f6 exf6 2.Bxf6 Qc5+ 3.Rf2 Qxc4 4.Qxd6 >>0:00:01.3 ( 8/20) 369391 0.66 1.h3 (Mat=0,50=0) >>0:00:02.7 ( 9/22) 732766 0.96 1.h3 Nxd4 2.Qxd4 e5 3.Qe3 Bxf5 4.exf5 Rxc4 >>5.f6 (Mat=135,50=0) >>0:00:04.5 (10/22) 1205944 0.90 1.h3 Nxd4 2.Qxd4 e5 3.Qd2 Bxf5 4.exf5 Qb6+ >>0:00:10.7 (11/29) 3128990 1.07 1.h3 Nxd4 2.Qxd4 e5 3.Qd5 Qb6+ 4.Rf2 Rc5 >>5.Qd3 gxf5 (Mat=-105,50=0) >>0:00:21.3 (11/29) 5898800 1.08 1.Qh6 (Mat=0,50=1) >>0:00:43.4 (11/30) 12099591 1.55 1.Qh6 f6 2.fxg6 Qh5 3.gxh7+ Kh8 4.Qe3 b6 >>5.Nd5 (Mat=200,50=1) > >h3 seems much stronger for crafty: > 12 30.26 2.33 1. h3 Be2 2. b4 Qxb4 3. Rfb1 Qxc4 4. > Nxe2 Qa6 5. Bc3 h6 6. fxg6 fxg6 >> >>1.Qh6 Nxd4 2.Nd5 Rfe8 3.f6 Ne6 4.fxe7 and smash. >> >>[D]r1b2r1k/ppppq1pp/2n1n3/6N1/2B2P2/4B3/PPP3PP/R2Q1RK1 w - - bm Nxh7; id >>"ECM.1612"; >> >>I don't really understand this position. 1.Nxh7 Kxh7 2.Qh5+ Kg8 3.f5 Ne5 4.Bb3 >>Qe8 5. Qh4 probably ? >>Nice position. 1.Bxe6 dxe6 2.Qd3 g6 3.Rad1 - nice position,too. 1.Qh5 g6 2.Qh6 >>Qg7 3.Qxg7+ etc as Crafty suggested - not bad either. >>Is there some original analysis availlable explaining it? >> >>0:01:26.4 (13/35) 24211223 0.64 1.Bxe6 dxe6 2.Qd3 g6 3.Rad1 Rf5 4.Qc3+ Kg8 >> (Mat=0,50=4) >> >> >>The other positions all look like they have a nice and singular solution. >> >>Regards, >>pete
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.