Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 11:05:44 05/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 30, 2003 at 09:57:22, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 30, 2003 at 09:34:58, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On May 30, 2003 at 08:46:07, Drexel,Michael wrote: >> >>>On May 30, 2003 at 08:22:07, m.d.hurd wrote: >>> >>>>If your interested. Athlon 2100 XP 1024 pc2700 ram. The point is why did >>>>Shredder play Rook takes Bishop ? >>> >>>Because it was necessary. It was the best chance in this position. >>>Otherwise black would have a decisive attack against the white King. >>>This was not at all over-agressive. >>>Black played agressive chess in this game. >>> >>>Michael >> >>The real question is why did Shredder play 52.Qd2 when after this move it is >>forced to sacrifice the rook for a bishop when there was a better >>alternative(52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qe3 with repetition). >> >>It seems that Shredder lost because it did not want a draw. >>If aggresive chess mean trying to win when it is impossible to do it then it >>means that shredder was too aggresive. >> >>[D]8/3Rp1k1/4qbpp/P2R1p2/4p2P/2r1Q1P1/5P2/5K2 w - - 0 1 >> >>Analysis by Shredder 7.04: >> >>52.a6 Rxe3 53.fxe3 >> -+ (-3.11) Depth: 1/2 00:00:00 >>52.a6 Rxe3 53.fxe3 Qxa6+ 54.Kf2 >> -+ (-4.60) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>52.a6 Qxa6+ 53.Ke1 Rxe3+ 54.fxe3 >> -+ (-4.07) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>52.R5d6 Qxd6 53.Rxd6 Rxe3 >> -+ (-3.93) Depth: 1/5 00:00:00 >>52.R5d6 Qxd6 53.Rxd6 Rxe3 >> -+ (-3.93) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 >> ± (1.04) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 >> +- (2.74) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 >> +- (2.74) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 Qg8 >> +- (2.41) Depth: 2/6 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 Qg8 >> +- (2.41) Depth: 2/7 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 Rc1+ 53.Kg2 Qxb6 >> +- (2.16) Depth: 3/7 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 Rc1+ 53.Kg2 Qg8 >> +- (2.27) Depth: 3/7 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb7 Ra6 >> +- (2.32) Depth: 4/9 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 Rc1+ 53.Kg2 Rc6 54.Qb7 Ra6 >> +- (2.26) Depth: 5/14 00:00:00 >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb7 Ra6 54.Kg1 Kh7 >> +- (2.49) Depth: 6/14 00:00:00 17kN >>52.Qb6 Rc1+ 53.Kg2 Rc6 54.Qb7 Ra6 55.Qc8 Kh7 >> +- (2.37) Depth: 7/17 00:00:00 49kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb7 Ra6 54.h5 e3 55.hxg6 exf2 56.Kxf2 Kxg6 >> +- (2.49) Depth: 8/19 00:00:01 138kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb7 e3 54.fxe3 Qxe3 55.Rd1 Qf3+ 56.Kg1 >> +- (2.24) Depth: 9/22 00:00:01 204kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb5 Rc2 54.Rd2 Rxd2 55.Rxd2 Bc3 56.Rd5 Qc8 >> +- (2.02) Depth: 9/22 00:00:02 325kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb5 Rc2 54.Rd2 Rc1+ 55.Rd1 Rxd1+ 56.Rxd1 Qa2 57.Qa4 Qxa4 >> +- (1.98) Depth: 10/22 00:00:04 622kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb5 f4 54.h5 Qh3+ 55.Kg1 fxg3 56.hxg6 Rc1+ 57.Rd1 Qh2+ 58.Kf1 >>Qxf2# >> +- (1.73) Depth: 11/28 00:00:09 1473kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb3 Rc3 54.Qb5 e3 55.Qb6 Rc1+ 56.Rd1 Rxd1+ 57.Kg2 Qxd7 58.h5 >> ± (1.27) Depth: 11/32 00:00:21 3597kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb3 Rc3 54.Qb5 e3 55.Qe2 Ra3 56.Rd8 Bc3 57.Qxe3 Qxe3 >> ± (1.21) Depth: 12/38 00:00:44 7695kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb3 f4 54.Kg2 e3 55.gxf4 e2 56.R5d6 Qxb3 57.Rxe7+ Bxe7 58.Rxc6 e1Q >> ± (0.96) Depth: 13/38 00:01:45 17853kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb1 e3 54.fxe3 f4 55.Qe1 fxe3 56.g4 Rc2 57.Rxe7+ Bxe7 >> ² (0.48) Depth: 13/38 00:02:43 27056kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qb1 f4 54.Qb5 fxg3 55.Rg5 Qxd7 56.Rc5 Bxh4 57.Qxc6 Qxc6 58.fxg3 >>Qxc5 >> = (0.23) Depth: 14/43 00:07:53 76930kN >>52.Qb6 Rc6 53.Qe3 >> = (0.00) Depth: 14/43 00:11:48 115350kN >> >>(Blass, Tel-Aviv 30.05.2003) >> >> >>Uri > >I continued to analyze with shredder and got the following(No Qd2): > > >52.R5d6 Qe5 53.Qe2 Qxa5 > = (0.01) Depth: 14/43 00:14:16 138892kN >52.R5d6 Qe5 53.Qb6 e3 54.g4 exf2 55.Qe3 Rxe3 56.Rxe7+ Bxe7 57.Rxg6+ Kxg6 >58.gxf5+ Qxf5 > = (0.21) Depth: 14/43 00:15:50 154063kN >52.Qf4 e3 53.R5d6 e2+ 54.Ke1 Qa2 55.Rxf6 Qb1+ 56.Kxe2 Rc2+ 57.Rd2 Qb5+ 58.Kf3 >Rc3+ 59.Kg2 Rxg3+ > = (0.22) Depth: 14/43 00:18:19 177963kN >52.Qf4 Rf3 53.Qd6 Qxd6 54.R5xd6 e3 55.Re6 Rxf2+ 56.Ke1 Rf3 57.h5 Rxg3 58.hxg6 f4 >59.Rdxe7+ Bxe7 > ² (0.37) Depth: 14/43 00:20:21 198253kN >52.Qf4 Rf3 53.Qd6 Qxd6 54.R5xd6 e3 55.Re6 Rxf2+ 56.Ke1 Rf3 57.a6 Rxg3 58.a7 Rg1+ >59.Ke2 Ra1 60.Kxe3 Bxh4 > = (0.18) Depth: 15/43 00:23:14 227474kN > >(Blass, Tel-Aviv 30.05.2003) > >Uri White should go for a Repetition of moves with 52.Qb6. Black is the side who has the winning chances here if White dares to play on. Michael
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.