Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 15:22:29 10/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 2002 at 12:18:38, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On October 25, 2002 at 09:55:48, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>
>>On October 24, 2002 at 17:17:19, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>Here is a game where Kramnik played black, and he made the same sort of
>>>sacrifice he made against Deep Fritz,
>>
>>Wrong!
>>
>>
>>>but he made it against Anand, and he
>>>got rapped for it. Crafty says this just drops a piece. I ran the position
>>>after
>>>Bxf2 to a pretty deep depth and the score didn't change as I even followed the
>>>game for a move or two deeper. If you let Crafty search for a black move
>>>there, it likes either the rook move as suggested in the annotation, or Nd8
>>>if you let it search longer than one second... Score after Bxf2 is +3.5, score
>>>after Nd8 is +.5.
>>
>>I think we could prove very quickly why it's way too early that we could rely on
>>the research with our actual PC programs. Also you miss the complete problem of
>>that game. It's not at all the same or similar to the Nxf7 against Deep Fritz.
>
>It is similar for one main reason: It simply drops a piece for nothing.
>
>So in that regard, it was a sacrifice that was unsound, which could be called
>a blunder by most any definition since it causes an equal position to turn into
>a dead lost position.
What are you talking about? The position IS already lost! So it is NOT similar
to the Kramnik-Deep Fritz position!
Rolf Tueschen
>
>>
>>First the surprise. 15.h3 is already the refutation of the line! Tjat was the
>>novelty. Kranik followed an older idea and lost his B on h5. That was the clue
>>of h3. Kramnik still tried Bxf2 but Anand had analysed the line till the 27th
>>move at home with his second. - That's all. Nothing to discover here, the whole
>>line is not ok for Black.
>>
>>Why Kramnik played such not 100% analysed positions? Where did he do that? In
>>Tilburg, aha, fine. Did he make such weak moves against Kasparov? Apparently
>>not. Conclusion? Different situations with different importances.
>>
>>Rolf Tueschen
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>That seems to qualify as either a blunder or unsound sac... your choice. Here
>>>is the relevant PGN:
>>>
>>>[Event "1998.10.23"]
>>>[Site "Tilburg"]
>>>[Date "1998.11.10"]
>>>[Round "2"]
>>>[White "Anand, Viswanathan"]
>>>[WhiteElo "2795"]
>>>[Black "Kramnik"]
>>>[BlackElo "2780"]
>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>[Annotator "Crafty v19.1"]
>>>{annotating for player Kramnik}
>>>{using a scoring margin of +1.00 pawns.}
>>>{search time limit is 1.00}
>>>
>>> 1. e4 e5
>>> 2. Nf3 Nf6
>>> 3. Nxe5 d6
>>> 4. Nf3 Nxe4
>>> 5. d4 d5
>>> 6. Bd3 Nc6
>>> 7. O-O Be7
>>> 8. Re1 Bg4
>>> 9. c3 f5
>>> 10. Qb3 O-O
>>> 11. Nbd2 Na5
>>> 12. Qa4 Nc6
>>> 13. Bb5 Nxd2
>>> 14. Nxd2 Qd6
>>> 15. h3 Bh5
>>> 16. Nb3 Bh4
>>> 17. Nc5 Bxf2+
>>> ({7:+3.33} 17. ... Bxf2+ 18. Kxf2 Nd8 19. Kg1 c6 20. Bd3 b6 21.
>>>Nb3 $18)
>>> ({7:+0.15} 17. ... Rfe8 18. Bd2 a6 19. Rxe8+ Rxe8 20. Bxc6 bxc6
>>>21. Qxa6 Re2 $10)
>>> 18. Kxf2 Qh2
>>> ({8:+4.91} 18. ... Qh2 19. Bxc6 bxc6 20. Qxc6 Qd6 21. Qxd6 cxd6
>>>22. Ne6 Rfe8 $18)
>>> ({8:+3.61} 18. ... Nd8 19. Qc2 Bg6 20. Nd7 a6 21. Nxf8 axb5 22.
>>>Nxg6 Qxg6 $18)
>>> 19. Bxc6 bxc6
>>> 20. Qxc6 f4
>>> 21. Qxd5+ Kh8
>>> 22. Qxh5 f3
>>> 23. Qxf3 Rxf3+
>>> 24. Kxf3 Rf8+
>>> 25. Ke2 Qxg2+
>>> 26. Kd3 Qxh3+
>>> 27. Kc2 Qg2+
>>> 28. Bd2 Qg6+
>>> 29. Re4 h5
>>> 30. Re1 Re8
>>> 31. Kc1 Rxe4
>>> 32. Nxe4 h4
>>> 33. Ng5 Qh5
>>> 34. Re3 Kg8
>>> 35. c4
>>> 1-0
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.