Author: Ernst A. Heinz
Date: 14:10:04 07/23/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 1998 at 12:52:25, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On July 23, 1998 at 12:28:13, Amir Ban wrote: > >>It does look bad for white, but resigning here is premature. > >I would have dragged it out a little more, too, but it is possible that Ed saw >he was going to lose a pawn or two and decided to call it quits. > >That big trade down into an ending was interesting. Mine would have played Nxf7 >and the rest of that as well, thinking it was doing just dandy at the start, >then a little less dandy as the end of the exchange came closer. > >Two bishops will kill a rook, but there has to be some point where you add >enough pawns to go with the rook that you'd prefer the rook. You'd think that >three pawns would be beyond that point. Yes, most programs including "DarkThought" obviously thought so ... "DarkThought" suggests another interesting move/sacrifice(?) for White on move 29 which I deem worthwhile to analyze further: PV = 29. Rd3?! Rc1+ 30. Ke2 Rxh1 31. Kxe3 ... "DarkThought" scores this as +1.3 for White and keeps this score up to the completion of iteration #15 when started with the position *after* 31. Kxe3. Any comments from the chess-savvy readres of CCC? =Ernst= > >I wonder what was going through Anand's mind during that game. > >bruce Very interesting question, indeed!
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.