Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Position for discussion

Author: Janosch Zwerensky

Date: 03:55:01 11/10/01


Hi all,

in a blitz game I recently played on the chessbase server I got the following
position:

[D] r5k1/2q4p/2b1p1p1/1p1pP1B1/1P1Pp1PP/2P2rn1/2B1Q1K1/R3R3 w - - 0 1 ,

in which I played Qxf3, which I think is best and gives white some advantage.
After playing out the first moves of the line in question, GambitTiger agrees
with that view of mine:

[D] r5k1/2q4p/2b1p1p1/1p1pP1B1/1P1P2PP/2P2pK1/2B5/R3R3 b - - 0 1

Analysis by Gambit Tiger 2.0:

32...Txa1 33.Txa1 Lb7 34.Ld2 Df7 35.Kf2 De7 36.g5
  ³  (-0.44)   Tiefe: 7   00:00:00  54kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ta1 Dc8 35.Kf2 Lb7 36.Ta3 Df8
  ³  (-0.56)   Tiefe: 7   00:00:00  64kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ta1 Lb7 35.Ld2
  ³  (-0.44)   Tiefe: 8   00:00:00  78kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Te3 Dc4 35.Txf3 De2 36.Tf2 De1 37.Kg2 Dxc3
  =  (0.22)   Tiefe: 9   00:00:01  145kN
32...Txa1 33.Txa1 Lb7 34.Ld2 Df7 35.Kf2 Kg7 36.Ld1 De7 37.Lxf3 Dxh4+ 38.Kg2
  =  (0.04)   Tiefe: 9   00:00:01  190kN
32...h6 33.Lxh6 Kh7 34.Txa8 Lxa8 35.Ld2 Dc4 36.Kf2 Da2 37.Tc1
  =  (-0.02)   Tiefe: 9   00:00:01  226kN
32...h6 33.Lxh6
  =  (-0.02)   Tiefe: 10   00:00:02  341kN
32...h6 33.Lxh6 Txa1 34.Txa1 Le8 35.Ld2 De7 36.Ld1 f2 37.Kxf2 Dxh4+ 38.Kg2 Lc6
  ²  (0.66)   Tiefe: 11   00:00:04  545kN
32...Txa1 33.Txa1 h5 34.gxh5 Le8 35.Ld2 g5 36.hxg5 Lxh5 37.Kh2 Kf7 38.Tf1
  ²  (0.38)   Tiefe: 11   00:00:06  774kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Te3 Dc4 35.Txf3 De2 36.Lh6 De1+ 37.Kg2 De2+ 38.Tf2
Dxg4+ 39.Kf1 Dh3+ 40.Ke2 Dg4+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 11   00:00:07  911kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Te3 Dc4 35.Txf3 Kg7 36.Le7 De2 37.Tf2 De3+ 38.Kg2 Dxc3
39.Lf6+ Kf7 40.Lg5+ Ke8
  =  (0.16)   Tiefe: 12   00:00:13  1694kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ld2 Dc4 35.Kxf3 Da2 36.Tc1 Lc6 37.Kf2 Db2 38.g5 Kf7
39.Kg2 Ke7
  ±  (0.74)   Tiefe: 13   00:00:24  3209kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ld2 Da7 35.Lb1 De7 36.Tf1 Lc6 37.Txf3 Kg7 38.Lg5 Dc7
39.Kg2 h6
  ±  (0.94)   Tiefe: 14   00:01:11  9400kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+
  ±  (0.94)   Tiefe: 15   00:02:58  23483kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ld2 Da7 35.Lb1 Lc6 36.Kxf3 Da3 37.Ke2 Db3 38.g5 Db2
39.Ld3 Kf7 40.Tf1+ Ke7
  ±  (1.00)   Tiefe: 16   00:03:15  25901kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ld2 Dc4 35.Lb1 Lc6 36.Kxf3 Kg7 37.g5 Kf7 38.Kf2 Ke7
39.Kg2 Ke8
  ±  (1.00)   Tiefe: 17   00:08:21  67589kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ld2 Dc4 35.Lb1 Lc6 36.Kxf3 Kg7 37.g5 Kf7 38.Kg2 Ke7
39.Te3 Db3 40.Ld3 Db2 41.Te2 Kd7
  ±  (1.02)   Tiefe: 18   00:13:28  110781kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ld2 Dc4 35.Lb1 Lc6 36.Kxf3 Kg7 37.g5 Kf7 38.Kg2 Ke7
39.Te3 Db3 40.Ld3 Db2 41.Te2 Kd7
  ±  (1.02)   Tiefe: 19   00:30:21  238298kN
32...Lb7 33.Txa8+ Lxa8 34.Ld2 Dc4 35.Lb1 Lc6 36.Kxf3 Kg7 37.g5 Kf7 38.Kg2 Ke7
39.Te3 Db3 40.Ld3 Dd1 41.Le1 Dc1
  ±  (1.12)   Tiefe: 20   01:05:05  497524kN

No program I tested so far has reproduced my choice in any reasonable amount of
time, with everyone going for Rxa8 in this position. For example, GT2 gives the
following analysis:

r5k1/2q4p/2b1p1p1/1p1pP1B1/1P1Pp1PP/2P2rn1/2B1Q1K1/R3R3 w - - 0 1

Analysis by Gambit Tiger 2.0:

31.Txa8+
  µ  (-1.26)   Tiefe: 9   00:00:00  50kN
31.Txa8+
  -+  (-2.16)   Tiefe: 9   00:00:01  117kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Lc6 33.Dc5 Df7 34.Ld1 Tf1 35.Txf1 Dxf1+ 36.Kxg3 Dg1+
37.Kh3
  ³  (-0.68)   Tiefe: 9   00:00:01  208kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Lc6
  ³  (-0.68)   Tiefe: 10   00:00:01  224kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (-0.15)   Tiefe: 11   00:00:08  1219kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (-0.15)   Tiefe: 12   00:00:15  2112kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (-0.15)   Tiefe: 13   00:00:33  4924kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (-0.15)   Tiefe: 14   00:01:08  10170kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Lc6 33.Dc5 Df7 34.Dxc6 Tf2+ 35.Kh3 Sh5 36.Lxe4 dxe4
37.Dxe4 Sf4+ 38.Kg3 Sd5 39.Te2
  ²  (0.34)   Tiefe: 15   00:05:22  49144kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Lc6 33.Dc5 Df7 34.Lf6 Txf6 35.exf6 Dxf6 36.Ld1 Df4 37.Dxc6
Dd2+ 38.Te2 Sxe2 39.De8+
  ²  (0.41)   Tiefe: 16   00:12:28  115805kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.Lh6 Dxc2+ 36.Kh3 Dc6
37.Dxc6 Lxc6 38.Kxg3 Tf3+
  =  (0.24)   Tiefe: 17   01:01:05  592067kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.Lh6 Dxc2+ 36.Kh3 Dc6
37.Dxc6 Lxc6 38.Kxg3 Tf3+
  ²  (0.26)   Tiefe: 18   02:08:00  1246880kN
31.Txa8+ Lxa8 32.Dxb5 Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.Lh6 Dxc2+ 36.Kh3 Dc6
37.Dxc6 Lxc6 38.Kxg3 Tf3+
  ±  (0.72)   Tiefe: 19   07:35:39  4365619kN

Now one might argue that GT2 failed high here and that, thus, Rxa8 might also
give white a strong advantage (and quite possibly a stronger one than the move I
played). Though I am not a good enough tactician to see through the
complications happening in this variation, I doubt that, still; after playing
out the first moves of that alternative to the text line, GT2 again seems to
agree with my views:

b5k1/2q4p/4p1p1/1Q1pP1B1/1P1Pp1PP/2P2rn1/2B3K1/4R3 b - - 0 1

Analysis by Gambit Tiger 2.0:

32...Lc6
  =  (-0.14)   Tiefe: 8   00:00:00  56kN
32...Lc6 33.Dc5 Df7 34.Dxc6 Tf2+ 35.Kh3 h6 36.Dc8+ Kh7 37.Kxg3 Txc2
  =  (0.16)   Tiefe: 8   00:00:00  63kN
32...Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 8   00:00:00  127kN
32...Dxc3 33.De8+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 9   00:00:01  172kN
32...Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 10   00:00:04  633kN
32...Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 11   00:00:12  1918kN
32...Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 12   00:00:44  5451kN
32...Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 13   00:02:07  14686kN
32...Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 14   00:08:29  63682kN
32...Dxc3 33.De8+ Tf8 34.Dxe6+ Tf7 35.De8+ Tf8 36.De6+
  =  (0.15)   Tiefe: 15   00:24:20  197699kN

I would now be interested to see what analysis other programs (and human
chessplayers) give on this position ;).

Regards,
Janosch.



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.