Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 13:54:03 07/23/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 1998 at 12:52:25, Bruce Moreland wrote: >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. But the whole stuff is wrong. Why don't we discuss g3 instead of Qh5+ with big trade ?! I guess this would have been better. Genius and cstal play it instead of qh5+. >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. The whites problem was not the rooks, it was that the rooks were not in the game. They were out of the game due to the king in between and later the black rook on 2nd rank. > You'd think that >three pawns would be beyond that point. > >I wonder what was going through Anand's mind during that game. he knew this from Bd6 19 minute thinking ! This was his trap to get a counter-chance in this game. Like he found the same trick in the 7th game. >bruce
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.