Author: Terry Ripple
Date: 02:34:52 10/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 29, 2002 at 05:08:15, Uri Blass wrote:
>On October 29, 2002 at 04:12:11, Terry Ripple wrote:
>
>>I don't understand why these two strong programs can't find Rxd4? Is it because
>>Qb2 is as good a move, or the way these two programs do their search?
>>
>>Regards,
>> Terry
>
>If you look at deep fritz7's analysis you can see that Qb2 is not a good move so
>the only reason that it does not play Rxd4 is that it evaluates Rxd4 as even
>worse.
>
>Can you beat or even draw against Fritz7 with Rxd4?
>
>I did not try but I do not think that you should assume that a move is good only
>because it was played in human-human games and the side who played it won the
>game.
>
>Uri
------------------
Hello Uri,
I do agree that humans do make mistakes and this can be seen from the very best
grandmasters in their own games. You can find usually some type of mistakes in
nearly all games played at any level of chess!
This is the game where only a 1933 player drew Hiarcs 8 with his sacrifice on
move #28, and so the move must be good to draw against such a strong program,
wouldn't you agree? If the sacrifice was the least unsound, then Hiarcs 8 would
have easily destroyed the 1900 player!
Regards,
Terry
Katz,Brian (1933) - Hiarcs 8 (2530) [D18]
40/80+30'/15+30'/15 Eatontown, 25.10.2002
[Katz,Brian]
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 c6 5.a4 Bf5 6.e3 Nbd7 7.Bxc4 e6 8.0-0 Nb6
9.Bd3 Bg4 10.h3 Bh5 11.a5 Nbd5 12.Be2 Bd6 13.a6 b6 14.Ne5 Bxe2 15.Qxe2 Nxc3
16.bxc3 Bxe5 17.dxe5 Nd7 18.Rd1 Qc7 19.f4 0-0 20.Ba3 c5 21.Rd6 Rad8 22.Qb5 Nb8
23.Rad1 Rxd6 24.exd6 Qc8 25.c4 Rd8 26.e4 Nc6 27.e5 Nd4 28.Rxd4 cxd4 29.c5 bxc5
30.Bxc5 d3 31.Kf2 d2 32.Ke2 d1R 33.Kxd1 Qd7 34.Qxd7 Rxd7 35.Kd2 Kf8 36.Kc3 Ke8
37.Kb4 f5 38.Kb5 g6 39.Bxa7 Rxa7 40.Kb6 Ra8 41.Kb7 Rd8 42.a7 ½-½
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.