Author: Slater Wold
Date: 14:29:21 08/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 09, 2002 at 15:26:28, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On August 09, 2002 at 14:36:41, Slater Wold wrote: > >>[D]1q4k1/1rb1rpp1/2p2n2/p2p4/3P2P1/2N1PQ1P/1P6/R1B2RK1 b - - 0 37 >> >>Anyone get Rxb2? >> >>I am @ work so I cannot really study this, but it looks pretty nice from what I >>can see. > >But IS the sac good? Tao does not see that the sack dramatically improves blacks >position at all. Here Tao's output after Rxb2 Bxb2 Qxb2: > >(only slighly worse than not playing the sac) > > 8. -96 478730 556240 c3e2 b2b3 a1b1 b3e3 f3e3 e7e3 b1b7 c7d6 g4g5 > e3e2 g5f6 > 9 -96 479330 835038 c3e2 b2b3 a1b1 b3e3 f3e3 e7e3 b1b7 c7d6 g4g5 > e3e2 g5f6 > 9. -96 480050 1157826 c3e2 b2b3 a1b1 b3e3 f3e3 e7e3 b1b7 c7d6 g4g5 > e3e2 g5f6 >10 -93 482350 2207490 c3e2 b2b3 e3e4 b3f3 f1f3 f6e4 f3e3 e7e6 e2c3 > c7f4 >10 -93 483340 2683425 f1c1!! >10 -86 484770 3403713 f1c1 b2d2 f3e2 d2e3 e2e3 e7e3 c3d1 e3g3 g1f1 > g3h3 d1f2 h3h2 c1c6 >10. -86 485650 3814386 f1c1 b2d2 f3e2 d2e3 e2e3 e7e3 c3d1 e3g3 g1f1 > g3h3 d1f2 h3h2 c1c6 >11 -73 492400 6796816 f1c1 b2d2 f3e2 d2e3 e2e3 e7e3 c3d1 e3g3 g1f1 > g3h3 c1c6 h3h1 f1e2 c7d8 >11. -73 495590 8190800 f1c1 b2d2 f3e2 d2e3 e2e3 e7e3 c3d1 e3g3 g1f1 > g3h3 c1c6 h3h1 f1e2 c7d8 >12 -63 529590 22420469 f1c1 b2d2 f3e2 d2e3 e2e3 e7e3 c3d1 e3h3 c1c6 > c7f4 d1f2 h3g3 g1f1 f6g4 f2g4 g3g4 a1a5 >12. -63 536730 25556548 f1c1 b2d2 f3e2 d2e3 e2e3 e7e3 c3d1 e3h3 c1c6 > c7f4 d1f2 h3g3 g1f1 f6g4 f2g4 g3g4 a1a5 >13 -68 601540 51335791 f1c1 b2d2 f3e2 d2e3 e2e3 e7e3 c3d1 e3e6 g1g2 > g7g5 d1c3 c7b6 a1a4 f6e4 > >Bas. I was at work. I had no idea if it was good. Looks like some programs see it.
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.