Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 18:49:00 02/03/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 03, 2003 at 21:00:07, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 03, 2003 at 19:39:53, Peter Berger wrote: > >>On February 03, 2003 at 17:14:41, Peter Berger wrote: >> >>>On February 03, 2003 at 16:29:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On February 03, 2003 at 14:15:12, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 03, 2003 at 12:32:19, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On February 03, 2003 at 02:12:30, J Mike wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On February 03, 2003 at 00:13:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>This is an opening that worked 20+ years ago. David Levy used it to beat >>>>>>>>Chess 4.x, and then Cray Blitz, in his much-publicized "wager". But it is >>>>>>>>no longer something that a program can't handle, if it understands anything >>>>>>>>about blocked pawns at all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>He was fortunate that this didn't go nuclear in his face... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I'd be surprised if he tries it again in game 6. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The comp actually played the position very badly. h3 and latter a3??? What the >>>>>>>hell was that? Even an 1800 won't play moves like h3 and a3 ... Kasprov should >>>>>>>have tried b5 after a3 or maybe b5 one move before a3 .. The comp was lucky that >>>>>>>this didn't go nuclear in it's face ... >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I was wondering when anyone would notice that Deep Junior was offering a piece >>>>>>for two moves in a row. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Sound or unsound (i.e. bug)? >>>>> >>>>>Matt >>>>> >>>> >>>>Sound. Most programs agreed. >>> >>>Crafty did, others didn't - I haven't analyzed the position in depth but it >>>looked _very_ dubious IMHO. >> >>OK - at least some variation should be given here - 17...b5? (signed by Mueller) >>18. cxb5 Qxc3 19. Qxc3 Rxc3 20. Bd4 is discussed in the comments of GM Mueller >>in the German comments on chessbase.de and said to be winning for white - that >>is debatable, to say the very least .. >> >>But after Kasparov played 17. .. Rfe8 and Junior opted for 18. a3?! , ..b5!? is >>definitely even more interesting . If now 19. cxb5 Qxc3 20. Qxc3 Rcx3 white >>looks simply miserable IMHO, whatever prog evals give. >> >>Of course I realize that better players discussed these positions at length - >>but at least they didn't manage to convince humble me yet. >> >>Peter > >18.cxb5 or 19.cxb5 is not forced in these lines. > >I believe that in both cases the move cxb5 is a losing blunder. this is nonsense of course. > >I think that the fact that GM Mueller said that after 17...b5 >18. cxb5 Qxc3 19. Qxc3 Rxc3 20. Bd4 is winning for white only show that we >cannot trust GM's evaluation and GM Mueller like Fritz8 seem to overevaluate >passed pawns. > >I have no proof that 17...b5 is losing but the fact that Fritz8's eval goes dow >every iteration clearly suggest it. > >I was surprised by Amir Ban's post that Junior was offering a piece for 2 moves >in a row because the piece offer is only in a line that was not played. obviously Junior intended to play it. > >I believe that black could get a small positional advantage by 17...b5 or >18...b5 when I do not assume capturing b5 but offering black some positional >advantage is not offering a piece. > >Uri
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.