Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:06:51 07/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2004 at 11:18:42, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 15, 2004 at 11:05:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 15, 2004 at 03:55:51, Peter Berger wrote: >> >>>On July 14, 2004 at 21:49:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On July 13, 2004 at 17:12:39, Peter Berger wrote: >>>> >>>>I would agree. I saw two openings that caught my eye. The Falcon (I think) >>>>opening with the blocked center pawn was one. The other was the SOS game with >>>>an early b3/Bb2 if I recall correctly. Crafty doesn't deal with wing-type >>>>openings very well, which will cause it to generally play them pretty poorly >>>>since it is trying to directly influence the center more than it should when >>>>trying a b3/Bb2 type development. >>> >>>Ah, you had a typo when you first mentioned the SOS game (h3 instead of b3). >>>Yes, I agree that Crafty didn't understand this position well - and I wouldn't >>>let it repeat this opening variation. I especially disliked Na3. >>> >>>But the position after the opening still looked OK - Crafty underestimated the >>>free pawns of the opponent though. >>> >>>>Nor do I. Things went very well, IMHO. It should not have lost the Fritz game. >>>> QPPP vs RRN is simply bad for the QPPP in 90% of the games. I'll look at this >>>>to see what went wrong. >>> >>>Frans Morsch mentioned that he gives a huge score for the queen in this kind of >>>position because they are nearly always won for the queen side :). >> >>He's wrong. Let him continue that. > >The question is what he means by the words "this kind of position" >He may mean not only to the material score but also to other conditions. > >Uri You could be right. But I doubt it, as adding lots of qualifications to such material imbalances has a cost in terms of speed...
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.