Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:32:50 04/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 05, 2002 at 15:24:56, Sune Larsson wrote:
>On April 05, 2002 at 14:49:47, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On April 05, 2002 at 13:55:43, Sune Larsson wrote:
>>
>>>The second game was a Petroff. Actually the first time Emanuel faced this
>>>opening in a tournament level game. (Except for one game played in a small
>>>tournament several years ago, when E chose 3.Nc3). Making it into one of
>>>the side lines, E sacrificed a pawn - actually played once by Arakhamia Grant
>>>in 1994. Fritz saw nothing better than returning the pawn, resulting in an
>>>ending RRB vs RRN. Black slowly got worse and drifted into an almost zugzwang
>>>position. Emanuel probably missed the win somewhere, maybe in move 46 and the
>>>result was a draw.
>>>
>>>During this game we had some syncronizing problems, due to having some coffee
>>>and not hearing the moves played by Fritz...;-) But we followed the ordinary
>>>clock beside the board. Here's the game which surely will inspire E to
>>>prepare something for the Petroff...
>>>
>>>
>>>[Event "Emanuel 120'"]
>>>[Site "Kil"]
>>>[Date "2002.04.05"]
>>>[Round "2"]
>>>[White "Berg, Emanuel"]
>>>[Black "Fritz 7"]
>>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>>[ECO "C42"]
>>>[WhiteElo "2500"]
>>>[PlyCount "131"]
>>>[EventDate "2002.??.??"]
>>>
>>>{256MB, Fritz7.ctg, PIII 800} 1. e4 {0} 1... e5 {0} 2. Nf3 {21} 2... Nf6 {
>>>0 First time Petroff for Emanuel...} 3. Nxe5 {85} 3... d6 {0} 4. Nf3 {14} 4...
>>>Nxe4 {0} 5. d4 {13} 5... d5 {0} 6. Bd3 {22} 6... Be7 {0} 7. O-O {34} 7... Nc6 {
>>>0} 8. c4 {(Te1) 42} 8... Nb4 {0} 9. Be2 {15} 9... O-O {0} 10. Nc3 {119} 10...
>>>Be6 {0} 11. Bf4 {(Le3) 224} 11... c5 {0} 12. dxc5 {171} 12... Bxc5 {0} 13. Na4
>>>$5 {(Sxc3) 416 A pawn sacrifice - actually played before by Arakhamia Grant vs
>>>Polgar 1/2-1/2 1994.} 13... dxc4 {-0.31/13 285 Polgar played 13.-Be7} 14. Nxc5
>>>{33} 14... Qxd1 {-0.47/13 47} 15. Rfxd1 {39} 15... Nxc5 {-0.31/14 78} 16. Bd6 {
>>>79} 16... Rfc8 {-0.31/14 74} 17. Nd4 {601} 17... Nbd3 {
>>>-0.16/15 0 Black finds nothing better than to return the pawn} 18. Nxe6 {
>>>(b3) 127 18.b3 was an alternative} 18... Nxe6 {-0.28/15 105} 19. Bxd3 {106}
>>>19... cxd3 {-0.25/16 0} 20. Rxd3 {12} 20... Rc2 {-0.16/16 369} 21. Be5 {(b4) 86
>>>} 21... f6 {-0.38/15 256 Fritz thinks he's better here, but Emanuel was
>>>optimistic and saw some options with bishop vs knight and pawns on both flanks.
>>>First white has to solve some minor problems though.} 22. Bc3 {44} 22... Rc8 {
>>>-0.28/15 249} 23. Rad1 {(Kf1) 168} 23... Nc5 {-0.22/14 200} 24. Rd4 {(Td2) 461}
>>>24... b5 {-0.19/15 264} 25. h4 $1 {(h3) 814} 25... a6 {-0.16/14 173} 26. Bb4 {
>>>(T1d2) 902} 26... Ne6 {-0.19/14 272} 27. Re4 {(Td6) 170} 27... Rc1 $1 {
>>>-0.47/14 122}
>
>>
>>Is there something wrong with 27...Rxb2?
>>
>>Uri
>
>
> Fritz obviously found some drawbacks with 27.-Rxb2.
Fritz saw an advantage for itself with 27...Rc1 so it is not clear that it found
that 27...Rxb2 was bad.
It is only clear from the pgn that Fritz evaluated 27...Rxb2 as less than 0.47
pawns advantage butif 27...Rxb2 could draw then it may be the best move because
in the game Emanuel got the advantage.
Uri
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.