Author: Slater Wold
Date: 16:41:11 05/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
Shredder will eventually pick and stick with Nh5. But g3, and it moves Nf6... It's not picking it for the right reasons, IMO. On May 30, 2004 at 15:11:10, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On May 30, 2004 at 14:58:45, Jorge Pichard wrote: > > >New game >r2q1rk1/pp1bbppp/2n1pn2/3p4/2PP4/1P1B1N2/PB1N1PPP/2RQ1RK1 b - - 0 1 > >Analysis by Shredder 8: > >1. ² (0.28): 1...Nh5 2.Re1 Nf4 3.Bb1 Qa5 4.Qc2 g6 5.Qc3 Qxc3 6.Rxc3 Bb4 7.Rce3 >Ba5 >2. ² (0.47): 1...Qa5 2.a3 dxc4 3.bxc4 Rad8 4.Qb3 Qh5 5.Rfe1 Na5 6.Qc2 Nc6 7.Ne4 >Ng4 8.Ng3 > >(Pichard, MyTown 30.05.2004) > > >>Kasparov-Deep Blue >>Philadelphia (6) 1996 >> >> >>The Opening has been a sucess for Kasparov. He has good central control, and >>prospects of a gradual queenside advance. More importantly, there is no direct >>plan for Black, so Deep Blue drifts for a few moves with disastrous >>consequences. The bishop is already a little clumpsy on d7; I suspect a strong >>human player would have sunk into thought, and devised a plan for deliverating >>his game. >> >>[D]r2q1rk1/pp1bbppp/2n1pn2/3p4/2PP4/1P1B1N2/PB1N1PPP/2RQ1RK1 b - - 0 1 >> >>11...Nh5? >>This over-ambitious idea met with strong disapproval from most strong human >>commentators. However, Yasser Seirawan said "oddly enough, one well-known chess >>computer scientist suggested that the move may well be OK, but it might need a >>highly advandce program and computer in a few years' time to justify this move". >>I suspect that this is a case in point of someone believing that a strong >>chess-playing program is doing something profound, when in fact is just >>crunching numbers, Few GMs back in 1996 felt that 11....Nh5 was anything other >>than a bad move.
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.