Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 12:02:45 11/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 2003 at 13:40:57, Slater Wold wrote: >I posted earlier, that in the following position Fritz blundered with Rg3? > >[D]6r1/4kp2/3p1bp1/q2BpP2/2P5/1P5R/1PQ3K1/8 w - - 0 73 > >Someone followed up, saying Rg3 Rc8 Bb7! was correct, so Qd1 was the blunder. I >don't think I agree, and Crafty 19.6 with a whole bunch of time doesn't either. >fxg6 is an *easy* draw. > > 6 0.10 -0.75 1. Rh7 gxf5+ 2. Kf2 Qb6+ 3. c5 Qxc5+ > 4. Qxc5 dxc5 5. Rxf7+ Kd6 6. Rd7+ Kxd7 > 7. Bxg8 > 6 0.19 -0.29 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Qd3 gxf5 3. Qxf5 Qd2+ > 4. Qf2 Qxf2+ 5. Kxf2 Re8 > 6-> 0.21 -0.29 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Qd3 gxf5 3. Qxf5 Qd2+ > 4. Qf2 Qxf2+ 5. Kxf2 Re8 (s=3) > 7 0.28 -0.05 1. Rg3 g5 2. Qe2 Qb4 3. Re3 g4 4. Kg3 > (s=2) > 7-> 0.33 -0.05 1. Rg3 g5 2. Qe2 Qb4 3. Re3 g4 4. Kg3 > 8 0.43 -0.11 1. Rg3 g5 2. Qe2 Qb4 3. Re3 Rg7 4. > Kg1 g4 > 8-> 0.55 -0.11 1. Rg3 g5 2. Qe2 Qb4 3. Re3 Rg7 4. > Kg1 g4 (s=2) > 9 0.88 -0.04 1. Rg3 g5 2. b4 Qb6 3. Qd2 Qd4 4. Qxd4 > exd4 5. Rd3 g4 > 9-> 1.32 -0.04 1. Rg3 g5 2. b4 Qb6 3. Qd2 Qd4 4. Qxd4 > exd4 5. Rd3 g4 (s=2) > 10 2.27 -0.14 1. Rg3 g5 2. Qe2 Qb4 3. Re3 Rg7 4. > Kg1 g4 5. Rg3 Kd7 6. Rxg4 Rxg4+ 7. > Qxg4 Qxb3 > 10-> 3.43 -0.14 1. Rg3 g5 2. Qe2 Qb4 3. Re3 Rg7 4. > Kg1 g4 5. Rg3 Kd7 6. Rxg4 Rxg4+ 7. > Qxg4 Qxb3 (s=2) > 11 7.72 -0.08 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rh8 3. fxg6 Qe1 4. > g7 Rg8 5. Qh7 Qxg3+ 6. Kxg3 Rxg7+ 7. > Qxg7 Bxg7 > 11-> 15.27 -0.08 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rh8 3. fxg6 Qe1 4. > g7 Rg8 5. Qh7 Qxg3+ 6. Kxg3 Rxg7+ 7. > Qxg7 Bxg7 (s=3) > 12 19.50 -0.41 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rh8 3. fxg6 Qe1 4. > Rh3 Rxh3 5. Kxh3 Qe3+ 6. Kg2 fxg6 7. > Be4 g5 (s=2) > 12-> 1:03 -0.41 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rh8 3. fxg6 Qe1 4. > Rh3 Rxh3 5. Kxh3 Qe3+ 6. Kg2 fxg6 7. > Be4 g5 (s=5) > 13 1:22 -0.45 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Be4 gxf5 3. Bxf5 Rh8 > 4. Qe2 Kd8 5. Rd3 Kc7 6. Rd5 Qb4 7. > Qd2 Qxd2+ 8. Rxd2 Bh4 (s=4) > 13-> 2:19 -0.45 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Be4 gxf5 3. Bxf5 Rh8 > 4. Qe2 Kd8 5. Rd3 Kc7 6. Rd5 Qb4 7. > Qd2 Qxd2+ 8. Rxd2 Bh4 (s=3) > 14 3:45 -0.28 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rb8 3. fxg6 Rxb7 > 4. g7 Bxg7 5. Rxg7 Qb4 6. Rg3 Rb8 7. > Qd3 Qb7+ 8. Kf2 Re8 (s=2) > 14-> 4:53 -0.28 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rb8 3. fxg6 Rxb7 > 4. g7 Bxg7 5. Rxg7 Qb4 6. Rg3 Rb8 7. > Qd3 Qb7+ 8. Kf2 Re8 > 15 6:04 -0.45 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rb8 3. fxg6 Rxb7 > 4. g7 Bxg7 5. Rxg7 Qb4 6. Rg3 Qe1 7. > Qd3 Qc1 8. Qe2 f5 > 15-> 11:45 -0.45 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rb8 3. fxg6 Rxb7 > 4. g7 Bxg7 5. Rxg7 Qb4 6. Rg3 Qe1 7. > Qd3 Qc1 8. Qe2 f5 (s=5) > 16 15:14 -0.30 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rb8 3. fxg6 Rxb7 > 4. g7 Bxg7 5. Rxg7 Qb4 6. Rg3 Ra7 7. > Rg7 Ra2 8. Kf3 <HT> (s=4) > 16-> 24:12 -0.30 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rb8 3. fxg6 Rxb7 > 4. g7 Bxg7 5. Rxg7 Qb4 6. Rg3 Ra7 7. > Rg7 Ra2 8. Kf3 <HT> (s=4) > 17 39:17 -0.55 1. Rg3 Rc8 2. Bb7 Rb8 3. fxg6 Rxb7 > 4. g7 Bxg7 5. Rxg7 Qb4 6. Rg3 Rb8 7. > Qd3 Ra8 8. Rg7 Ra2 9. Qc2 Ke6 (s=3) > 17 137:09 -0.21 1. fxg6 Rxg6+ 2. Rg3 Rxg3+ 3. Kxg3 > Qe1+ 4. Kg2 Bg5 5. Qf5 Qe2+ 6. Kg3 > Bf4+ 7. Kh4 Qf2+ 8. Kh5 Qh2+ 9. Kg4 > Qg1+ 10. Kh5 Qg7 11. b4 Qh8+ 12. Kg4 > Qg8+ 13. Kh5 Qg7 14. b5 Be3 > 17-> 156:29 -0.21 1. fxg6 Rxg6+ 2. Rg3 Rxg3+ 3. Kxg3 > Qe1+ 4. Kg2 Bg5 5. Qf5 Qe2+ 6. Kg3 > Bf4+ 7. Kh4 Qf2+ 8. Kh5 Qh2+ 9. Kg4 > Qg1+ 10. Kh5 Qg7 11. b4 Qh8+ 12. Kg4 > Qg8+ 13. Kh5 Qg7 14. b5 Be3 > 18 183:28 -0.15 1. fxg6 Rxg6+ 2. Rg3 Rxg3+ 3. Kxg3 > Qe1+ 4. Kg2 Bg5 5. Qf5 Qe2+ 6. Kg3 > Bf6 7. Qh7 <HT> > 18-> 308:07 -0.15 1. fxg6 Rxg6+ 2. Rg3 Rxg3+ 3. Kxg3 > Qe1+ 4. Kg2 Bg5 5. Qf5 Qe2+ 6. Kg3 > Bf6 7. Qh7 Qe1+ <HT> (s=6) > time=360:00 cpu=199% mat=0 n=28954780325 fh=90% nps=1340k > ext-> chk=-1837317311 cap=62576292 pp=17515987 1rep=165607790 mate >=6239465 > predicted=0 nodes=28954780325 evals=3687863267 > endgame tablebase-> probes=19683 hits=587 > SMP-> split=10307 stop=2452 data=12/4096 cpu=718:58 elap=360: >00 > > >Looking at Rg3 Rc8 Bb7! deeper, it does appear to be a draw also, but has a >*lot* of losing possibilities. Qb1 *was* the real loser here. > >Can *anyone* get another engine to even look at Qb1 here? I couldn't. > >[D]2r5/4kp2/3p1bp1/q2BpP2/2P5/1P4R1/1PQ3K1/8 w - - Fritz 8 does ;-) on depth 13 Qc3, Qd1 and Qf2 are evaluated with 0.00 Bb7 with -0.13. Shredder gives Qd1 -0.8 and show it only at fifth place. regards Joachim P.S.: Do you know, that Shredder easily could have won the first game with 30.Rxf4! [D]5k1r/1b1r1ppB/2qN2P1/p2nP3/1p3n1Q/8/PPP2R1P/1K1R4 w - -
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.