Author: Uri Blass
Date: 23:44:50 08/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 2003 at 23:36:09, Terry McCracken wrote: >On August 04, 2003 at 16:33:45, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 04, 2003 at 14:06:26, Dan Andersson wrote: >> >>> One might argue its objective value. But when it took many games and much >>>analysis to get a reasonable defence against it. And one slip is enough to lose >>>as black. While white gets lots of time to use the initiative. >>> >>>MvH >> >>I remember that I analyzed fxe6 with genius3(p100) and I gave Genius3(white) 30 >>minutes per move against 3 minute per move for Genius3(black). >> >>White got nothing from the opening and black even traded queens and got a >>winning endgame. >> >>Uri > >The sac is sound, only 10 Grandmasters have played against 7..Nxe6, not counting >Kasparov's game against Deep Blue, 7..Nxe6 won 9 out of ten games, I suspect the >GM blundered. > >What this tells me, 7..Nxe6 is very strong and wins, and at worst it draws. > >I've won many Bullet games with 7..Nxe6 > >Terry I do not know. Maybe the blunder was of the 9 GM's and we need to analyze the relevant games to know. Bob Hyatt also said that an IM beated commercial programs with black in that line. I believe that kasparov was not ready for that line and I could expect him to play better later in case of being ready. He had no prepared lines against it. If he did an error of going for that line on purpose(I do not know) than the error is different than preparing the line against commercial programs and he simply did not believe that the computer is going to sacrifice(possible reasons may be believing that the computer is already out of book because it used time for previous move or believeing that the line is bad for computers based on advice that he got and as a result not believing that deeper blue is going to play it). 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.