Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 18:31:59 01/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2002 at 03:57:44, Steve Timson wrote: >In fact, as Vincent pointed out, the +1 and the +3 versions are both faulty, and the +3 pawns looks a tactical score to me. but the +1 is a too optimistic score for sure. Note that this position from pure tactical viewpoint is not real interesting because other moves than Bxc6 win too here for white. That's what i hate most about about most extensions: when everyone already knows you are won, then suddenly they add even more tactical to your score. >driven solely by overly enthusiastic king safety eval. I didn't look at it >closely when I tested and posted the result. So chester was just demonstrating >fast application of bad logic that coincidentally matched the real solution. well it does win harder than other bishop moves do. bxc6 IS tactical winning, but the real trick is deeper than the +1.x The real question here is does it also give away a piece for 3 pawns when it is NO good to give it away? >On January 24, 2002 at 16:08:54, Scott Gasch wrote: > >>Hi Steve, >> >>How long until the PV has a score of approx +3? Could the solution at ply 8-10 >>be due to king safety (score is +1) and not tactical? >> >>Scott
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.