Author: martin fierz
Date: 05:24:12 12/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 19, 2003 at 00:37:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 17, 2003 at 17:58:13, Omid David Tabibi wrote: [snip] >>10/32 28.32 4291k 151k -0.14 1...e4g3 >>10/32 34.99 5339k 152k 0.28 1...e4g3 1.h2g3 c8c7 2.g3f2 c7e5 >> 3.f2g1 e5d4 4.g1h1 d5c7 5.a4b3 e8e6 >> 6.h1h2 >>11/37 58.43 9054k 154k 0.33 1...e4g3 1.h2g3 c8c7 2.g3f2 c7e5 >> 3.d4f3 e5e2 4.f2g1 c5c2 5.f3e1 b4e1 >> 6.a4g4 e1f2 7.g1h1 e2g4 8.h3g4 >> >> >>A classical example of a game where evaluation is more important than 10 to 1 >>time handicap :) > >Yes, but _not_ the way you think. How many times do you do that sac where >it is _wrong_? knight for pawns is only good if it leads to an immediate >tactical win. Your PV isn't showing that. his PV is showing that it wins the piece back, both at depth 11 and depth 12. so this is not about "knight for pawns" or "bad trade". read, think, write :-) cheers martin
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.