Author: Terry Ripple
Date: 00:28:24 09/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 03, 2002 at 03:11:13, Terry Ripple wrote:
>On September 03, 2002 at 02:13:32, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On September 02, 2002 at 19:43:39, Terry Ripple wrote:
>>
>>>On September 02, 2002 at 14:13:18, Roy Eassa wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 02, 2002 at 14:07:18, Terry Ripple wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On September 02, 2002 at 13:12:39, Roy Eassa wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On September 02, 2002 at 00:56:19, Jouni Uski wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[D]r2q1r1k/p2bb3/1pn1p1Q1/4P3/2pP4/2P5/P4PPP/1RB2RK1 w - - 0 19
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>best move is Re1!!, which Brutus played in tournament level
>>>>>>>(Qh5+ seems to lead to draw)
>>>>>>>in my AMD 450 Mhz no program finds Re1 in 1 hour (Goliath 3.6 took 61 min)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Jouni
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm pretty sure Fritz 7 wouldn't find it in under an hour.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Here's a quick analysis:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1.Re1!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [or 1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+ Rxg8 6.f4 +-]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1...Be8 2.Qh6+ Kg8 3.Re3 Nxe5
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [3...Bh4 4.Re4 Bxf2+ 5.Kh1 Nxe5 6.Rxe5 Bxd4 7.Rg5+ Qxg5 8.Bxg5 Bg7
>>>>>> 9.Qxe6+ Bf7 10.Qg4 +-]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>4.Qxe6+ Rf7 5.Rg3+ Kh8 6.Bf4 Nf3+ 7.gxf3 Bf6 8.Be5 +-
>>>>>----------------------------------
>>>>>I'am only using an AMD 266 Mhz with 64 Ram! I let Fritz run for almost 4 hours
>>>>>which should simulate a faster (1,000 Mhz) processor running around 1 hour.
>>>>>
>>>>>Fritz 7 didn't find "Re1", but the line it uses wins back a Rook and the passed
>>>>>pawns on the Kingside look dangerous for Black in the ending if played correctly
>>>>>
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>> Terry
>>>>>
>>>>> New position
>>>>>r2q1r1k/p2bb3/1pn1p1Q1/4P3/2pP4/2P5/P4PPP/1RB2RK1 w - - 0 1
>>>>>
>>>>>Analysis by Fritz 7:
>>>>>
>>>>>1.Qh5+
>>>>> ± (1.38) depth: 7/24 00:00:00 31kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Bf6 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Bxf8 Bxe5 5.Qh5+ Kg8
>>>>> +- (1.41) depth: 8/19 00:00:00 60kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Bf6 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Bxf8 Bxe5 5.Qh5+ Kg8 6.dxe5 Qxf8
>>>>> +- (1.41) depth: 9/23 00:00:01 140kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qh5 Be8 6.Qh3 Bg6
>>>>> +- (1.41) depth: 10/23 00:00:03 341kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qf3 Qg6 6.Qh3 Kg8 7.f4
>>>>> ± (1.16) depth: 11/27 00:00:09 1053kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qf3 Qg6 6.Qh3 Kg8
>>>>> ± (1.16) depth: 12/33 00:00:33 3846kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qf3 Qh7 6.Be3
>>>>> ± (1.10) depth: 13/36 00:03:49 25279kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>>>> ± (1.10) depth: 14/36 00:08:29 57986kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>>>> ± (1.07) depth: 15/39 00:23:03 161173kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>>>> ± (1.04) depth: 16/43 01:22:05 574067kN
>>>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>>>> ± (0.97) depth: 17/45 03:41:49 1573278kN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The line you give is identical to the line I showed in the first variation. It
>>>>is a perfectly good line and should also win the game. Too bad this position
>>>>didn't have just a single winning line.
>>>-------------------------------------------
>>>Searching for over 12 hours Fritz 7 still says that Qh5+ is a good move and i
>>>also believe that it's a good move!
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>> Terry
>>>
>>>New position
>>>r2q1r1k/p2bb3/1pn1p1Q1/4P3/2pP4/2P5/P4PPP/1RB2RK1 w - - 0 1
>>>
>>>Analysis by Fritz 7:
>>>
>>>1.Qh5+
>>> ± (1.38) depth: 7/24 00:00:00 31kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Bf6 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Bxf8 Bxe5 5.Qh5+ Kg8
>>> +- (1.41) depth: 8/19 00:00:00 60kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Bf6 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Bxf8 Bxe5 5.Qh5+ Kg8 6.dxe5 Qxf8
>>> +- (1.41) depth: 9/23 00:00:01 140kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qh5 Be8 6.Qh3 Bg6
>>> +- (1.41) depth: 10/23 00:00:03 341kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qf3 Qg6 6.Qh3 Kg8 7.f4
>>> ± (1.16) depth: 11/27 00:00:09 1053kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qf3 Qg6 6.Qh3 Kg8
>>> ± (1.16) depth: 12/33 00:00:33 3846kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qf3 Qh7 6.Be3
>>> ± (1.10) depth: 13/36 00:03:49 25279kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>> ± (1.10) depth: 14/36 00:08:29 57986kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>> ± (1.07) depth: 15/39 00:23:03 161173kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>> ± (1.04) depth: 16/43 01:22:05 574067kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>> ± (0.97) depth: 17/45 03:41:49 1573278kN
>>>1.Qh5+ Kg8 2.Bh6 Rf7 3.Qg6+ Kh8 4.Qxf7 Qg8 5.Qxg8+
>>> ± (0.97) depth: 18/49 12:38:51 5448205kN
>>
>>No
>>
>>Fritz does not believe that Qh5+ is a good move.
>>
>>1.41/10
>>1.16/11
>>1.16/12
>>1.10/13
>>1.10/14
>>1.07/15
>>1.04/16
>>0.97/17
>>0.97/18
>>
>>You see that the score is always goes down.
>>
>>0.97 does not mean winning and is often a draw.
>>
>>I doubt if Qh5+ is winning.
>>
>>Uri
>-----------------
>Hi Uri,
>This move certainly has equal chances if not a slight plus for White due to the
>passed pawns on the kingside!
>
>I would take White over the Black side any time!
>
>Regards,
> Terry
---------------
I would like to add that i never said Qh4+ is a winning move, but that it gives
White chances. White's small plus certainly comes from it's passed pawns plus
--Black's King swaying in the open breeze looks pretty pathetic!
It won't be easy for White to get the win, but he atleast has an opportunity for
this, where Black don't have much chances except for a draw if anything!
Regards,
Terry
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.