Author: Slater Wold
Date: 07:52:38 09/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 29, 2003 at 10:36:10, Alexander Yates wrote: >In Reply to: Re: Garry Kasparov - My Great Predecessors posted by Mark Young on >September 28, 2003 at 09:34:43: > > >On September 28, 2003 at 09:34:43, Mark Young wrote: > >>On September 28, 2003 at 04:38:08, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>On September 28, 2003 at 00:15:02, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>>H. Pillsbury - Em. Lasker >>>>After whites 17 move of f5 >>>> >>>>[D]2r2rk1/pp3pp1/4bb1p/q2p1P1Q/3P4/2N5/PP4PP/1K1R1B1R b - - 0 1 > > > >>>> >>>>Here GM Kasparov gives 17..Rxc3 a (!!) mark. With the comment that the move >>>>Rxc3!! is beyond the powers of even a strong computer. >>>> >>>>Is Rxc3 really beyond the powers of a strong computer? Or is the move Rxc3 not >>>>worthy of a (!!) because it leads only to a draw. This is what the computers see >>>>after blacks 17..Rxc3. >>> >>> >>> I do not think that 17...Rxc3 will be played by >>> any computer program. And by the way: I have still >>> not found a win for Black in the following line: >>> >>> [Event "40'/40+40'/40+40'"] >>> [Site "MyTown"] >>> [Date "????.??.??"] >>> [Round "?"] >>> [White "Neue Partie"] >>> [Black "?"] >>> [Result "1/2-1/2"] >>> [SetUp "1"] >>> [FEN "2r2rk1/pp3pp1/4bb1p/q2p1P1Q/3P4/2N5/PP4PP/1K1R1B1R b - - 0 1"] >>> [PlyCount "23"] >>> [TimeControl "40/2400:40/2400:2400"] >>> >>> 1... Rxc3 2. fxe6 Ra3 3. bxa3 Qb6+ 4. Kc2 Rc8+ 5. Kd2 Qxd4+ >>> 6. Ke1 Qc3+ 7. Ke2 Qc2+ 8. Rd2 Qe4+ 9. Kd1 Qb1+ 10. Ke2 Qe4+ >>> 11. Kd1 Qb1+ 12. Ke2 Qe4+ 1/2-1/2 >> >>I came to the same conclusion. I don't think there is a win after Rxc3 with best >>defense. This is why computer will not play the move. Computers see Bd7 holding >>a much better advantage. And it seems the computers are correct. > > >The computers are not correct. They can't see deep enough to find Rxc3!! >followed by Ra3! > >This game I'm sure has been well analyzed by many Grandmasters, not just >Kasparov, who BTW is the highest rated player of all time! > >There are many combinations still too difficult for computers, and that has been >demonstrated by various tests. Nolot comes to mind...#6 I believe. Regardless, >we know some combinations are too deep or abstruse for the computer at present >time. > >Even if a computer does find the move, it will take a very long time and it may >not be for the correct reasons. > >1... Rxc3 2. fxe6 Ra3 3. bxa3 Qb6+ 4. Kc2 Rc8+ 5. Kd2 Qxd4+ >6. Ke1 Qe3+ 7. Be2 fxe6 8. Qh3! Bc3+! 9. Kf1 Rf8+ 10. Bf3 Qe4! -+ > >There are other variations of course and the B retreat has merit so the machines >most likely will stay with Bd7, instead of moving on to the more complex Rxc3!! > >Just for the record, Lasker made this sacrifice famous, and Rxc3 is now regarded >as thematic. > >Alex > >P.S. > >Give this position to Deep Junior 8 and let it run a long time if you have a >dual, or Junior 8 if you have a very fast single...it might find Rxc3!!...? fxe6 is not best. e7 and this draws. I've looked over this several times.
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.