Author: Mark Young
Date: 16:28:56 09/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 29, 2003 at 19:18:34, Slater Wold wrote: >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!!...? > >Ok, let's go with this: > >1... Rxc3 2. fxe6 Ra3 3. bxa3 Qb6+ 4. Bb5 > >Then what? You seen the same line I did. I don't know how many GM's have looked at Rxc3 or how long GM Kasparov looked at the resulting positions after Rxc3. I find the position very hard to understand. I have yet to see a clear cut win. The problem for me is how to win after Bb5. If this line is broken I will be sure the Rxc3 is best.
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.