Author: Sune Larsson
Date: 06:06:14 12/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 2001 at 08:50:27, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>On December 23, 2001 at 03:21:58, Sune Larsson wrote:
>
>>
>> [D]2bq1rk1/1p2ppbp/r1np2p1/1N6/N1P1n3/1B2B3/PP2QPPP/R4RK1 b - - 0 13
>>
>> This is a position from the fourth game between Gambit Tiger and IM Berg 2500.
>> Here GT presented a theoretical novelty which, as far as I know, never before
>> has been tried. GT played 13.-Be6!?, inviting to an exchange sacrifice. Emanuel
>> called with 14.Bb6, but black had enough compensation with a pawn for the
>> exchange, the bishop pair and good control over the black squares. After some
>> complications the game levelled out to a draw. The whole game further down.
>>
>> PIII 800, 192 Mb hash, 2 hours per player for the whole game. Tigerbook used.
>>
>> A short summary of the 4 games played so far:
>>
>> In these games Gambit Tiger has not been able to put any serious pressure
>> on IM Berg. GT has in fact been very far from winning any of the games.
>> All games have been open with lots of piece play and tactics.
>>
>> Game 1: IM Berg had a winning endgame but slipped slightly and let Tiger
>> escape with a draw.
>>
>> Game 2: GT misplayed the ending with opposite colored bishops a bit and lost.
>> Emanuel showed great creativity in sacking 3 pawns and taking his
>> chances.
>>
>> Game 3: Emanuel attacked but GT countered good with 23.b5!. E had to
>> go for the brakes and a solid draw.
>>
>> Game 4: The game below. GT correctly sacked an exchanged in the opening,
>> got good compensation - and after some tactics the game ended
>> in a draw.
>>
>>
>> Result: Gambit Tiger 2.0 - IM Emanuel Berg 2500 1.5 - 2.5
>>
>>
>> After Christmas Emanuel will play in Hastings and then Bermudas.
>> We plan to resume these games ( maybe vs some new program) when he returns.
>
>I thought that he was going to play game Number #4 against Chess Tiger 14.0?
>
>Jorge
Emanuel was to decide this himself and chose to continue the match
vs Gambit Tiger 2.0
Sune
>
>>
>>[Event "Emanuel 120'"]
>>[Site "KIL"]
>>[Date "2001.12.17"]
>>[Round "4"]
>>[White "Berg, Emanuel"]
>>[Black "Gambit Tiger 2.0"]
>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>[ECO "B35"]
>>[WhiteElo "2500"]
>>[PlyCount "89"]
>>[EventDate "2001.12.11"]
>>
>>{192MB, PowerBig.ctg. PIII 800
>>} 1. e4 {. . Alterman,B 0} 1... c5 {-0.01/1 0}
>>2. Nf3 {6} 2... Nc6 {-0.01/1 0} 3. d4 {11} 3... cxd4 {-0.01/1 0} 4. Nxd4 {13}
>>4... g6 {-0.01/1 0} 5. Nc3 {55} 5... Bg7 {-0.01/1 0} 6. Be3 {10} 6... Nf6 {
>>-0.01/1 0} 7. Bc4 {56} 7... O-O {-0.01/1 0} 8. Bb3 {42} 8... a5 {-0.01/1 0} 9.
>>O-O {(This is what we around here call "the Nataf variation. Previously people
>>played 9.a4 to prevent black from doing the same. GM Nataf has shown that
>>white can get pressure and active piece play though.) 30} 9... a4 {-0.01/1 0}
>>10. Nxa4 {16} 10... Nxe4 {-0.01/1 0} 11. Nb5 {26} 11... Ra6 {0.60/13 118} 12.
>>c4 {207} 12... d6 {0.04/13 99} 13. Qe2 {163} 13... Be6 $146 {(This is a
>>theoretical
>>novelty by Tiger. Previously has been played 13.-Nf6. 13.-f5 is not so
>>good because white can still play 14.Bb6 (c5+ is waiting...). With the move 13.
>>-Be6, Tiger invites to an exchange sacrifice.) 0.14/14 197} 14. Bb6 {(Knowing t
>>hat black gets a pawn for the exchange + the bishop pair and good control over
>>the black squares. Still Emanuel wanted to "call" the position and see what
>>would happen. 14.Rad1 or even 14.Rfd1 would have kept the pressure.) 458} 14...
>>Rxb6 {-0.30/13 21} 15. Nxb6 {20} 15... Qxb6 {-0.48/16 101} 16. Qxe4 {12} 16...
>>Bxb2 {-0.42/15 200} 17. Rad1 {44} 17... Be5 {-0.44/14 272} 18. Kh1 {(White has
>>nothing on the queenside, so the chances are on the opposite wing. He also has
>>to keep an eye on the c-pawn.) 428} 18... Rd8 {-0.42/12 161} 19. h3 {504} 19...
>>Qc5 {-0.60/13 118} 20. f4 {362} 20... Bf6 {-0.80/14 111} 21. Nc7 {(If white is
>>to push the pawns on the kingside, he must find a way to get rid of black's
>>white squared bishop.) 497} 21... Bf5 {-0.36/17 352} 22. Qe1 {75} 22... e6 {
>>-0.38/14 118} 23. g4 {229} 23... Nd4 {-0.80/15 173} 24. gxf5 {136} 24... Qxc7 {
>>-0.76/14 37} 25. fxe6 {239} 25... Qc6+ {-0.76/14 111} 26. Kh2 {139} 26... Nf3+
>>{-0.78/15 206} 27. Rxf3 {320} 27... Qxf3 {-0.80/14 0} 28. exf7+ {28} 28... Kxf7
>>{-0.80/12 24} 29. Qg3 {(With equal play.) 206} 29... Qe2+ {-0.46/13 100} 30.
>>Qg2 {54} 30... Qe3 {-0.40/13 190} 31. Qxb7+ {393} 31... Kg8 {-0.46/15 785} 32.
>>Qd5+ {149} 32... Kh8 {-0.44/16 0} 33. Qd2 {94} 33... Qf3 {-0.50/15 10} 34. Re1
>>{661} 34... g5 {-0.42/17 0} 35. Qe3 {239} 35... Qxe3 {-0.32/17 662} 36. Rxe3 {
>>12} 36... gxf4 {0.52/16 98} 37. Re6 {31} 37... Be5 {0.16/16 98} 38. Ba4 {326}
>>38... f3+ {-0.15/14 79} 39. Kg1 {20} 39... Bd4+ {0.05/15 60} 40. Kf1 {37} 40...
>>f2 {0.04/15 38} 41. Re8+ {35} 41... Rxe8 {-0.09/19 36} 42. Bxe8 {9} 42... Kg7 {
>>-0.10/19 142} 43. a4 {3} 43... Bb6 {-0.14/18 188} 44. a5 {4} 44... Bxa5 {
>>-0.18/17 73} 45. Kxf2 {2} 1/2-1/2
>>
>>
>> Sune
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.