Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 06:46:27 11/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2001 at 07:14:35, Janosch Zwerensky wrote: > >>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. For some time, Rebel personality Q5T agreed wholeheartedly with your choice of move 1.Qxf3. A brave move! However, just now I see that 1.Rxc8 which is the second move on the list, after 9 min 45 sec. on a Celeron 500 MHz fails high... More computer analysis needed, I think, for Q5T to make up its mind! Rebel Engine for ECTool. (c) Ed Schröder Engine version : REBEL CENTURY 2 Rebel personality : "Q5T" Opening book file : RebelC.mvs Hash table size : 2 MB Analysis mode : Analyzing next move Refresh interval : 500 ms Game begin 00:00 04.00 -1.05 1.Qxf3 exf3+ 2.Kxg3 Rxa1 3.Rxa1 Bb7 4.Bd3+ Qxc3 00:00 06.00 -0.93 1.Qxf3 exf3+ 2.Kxg3 Rxa1 3.Rxa1 Bb7 4.Bd2 Qf7 5.Kh2 Kg7 00:01 07.00 -0.60 1.Qxf3 exf3+ 2.Kxg3 Rxa1 3.Rxa1 Bb7 4.Ra3 Qf7 5.Bf6 00:03 08.00 -1.21 1.Qxf3 exf3+ 2.Kxg3 Rxa1 3.Rxa1 Be8 4.Ra8 Qxc3 5.Rxe8+ Kf7 6.Re7+ Kf8 7.Kf2 Qxc2+ 8.Kxf3 00:16 09.00 -0.46 1.Qxf3 exf3+ 2.Kxg3 Rxa1 3.Rxa1 Bb7 4.Ra3+ h5 5.Kxf3 Qc4 6.Kf2 00:28 10.00 -0.83 1.Qxf3 exf3+ 2.Kxg3 Rxa1 3.Rxa1 Bb7 4.Ra3 01:42 11.00 -0.51 1.Qxf3 exf3+ 2.Kxg3 Rxa1 3.Rxa1 Bb7 4.Ra3 09:45 11.01 -0.51 1.Rxa8+ Regards, Eelco >>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: >> >>[D] 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: >> >>[D] 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 the position given at the top of this article ;). >> >>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.