Author: Stephen Ham
Date: 13:57:10 01/01/04
On December 30, 2003 at 07:28:55, Lex Loep wrote: >Perhaps a bit late but still nice reading, article by Gian-Carlo Pascutto. > >http://www.lokasoft.nl/deep_sjeng_in_wccc2003.html > >Lex "Up against the 512 processor monster! Deep Sjeng played well and got a nice attack going, but in the end white also got a passed a-pawn, and the game was drawn. A nice example of the simple attacking chess Deep Sjeng excels at. " The comment is not really exact. After 12. ... c6!, good book move, Diep was out of Book. If Diep had continued with 13. Rg1 instead of 13. Qb3?, the result would have been another thing. However, Sjeng was not able to exploit the wasted time by Diep from moves 13 to 17. On fact, 13. Qb3? begins a short wrong plan in the queen side when the attack is in the king side. At the end, several inaccuracies on the Sjeng behalf let Diep to save the game. Regards, Arturo Ochoa M. Dear Arturo, I think you have the board set up incorrectly. 13 Rg1 is impossible since White's previous move was 12 O-O. Nonetheless, you have a point in criticizing 13 Qb3?! At first glance, 13 a3(!) seems slightly better, when White has the strange looking option of replying to 13...Bxc3 with 14 bxc3!?. The benefit of this move order is that Deep Sjeng's 14...Nd5 doesn't automatically win White's dark-squared Bishop, since it can be re-routed via Be3-c1, a3-a4, and then Bc1-a3 with some advantage to White. Of course this is merely a hasty assessment on my part after seeing your illegal move suggestion. You are correct though that Deep Sjeng seems to have thrown away some advantage with imprecise play later. All the best, Stephen
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.