Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:36:08 07/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 20, 2004 at 04:54:30, martin fierz wrote: >On July 20, 2004 at 02:44:33, Roy Brunjes wrote: > >>Earlier I posted about this position with the question "Is the exchange >>sacrifice 13. ... Rxf4!? sound?" >> >>[D] r1b3k1/pp2n1b1/1qn1prpp/2pp4/5B1P/2PP1NP1/PPQ2PB1/RN3RK1 b - - 0 13 >> >>Some readers thought it should be, others were not so convinced they would play >>it themselves in a game (not necessarily a vote for or against the soundness, >>just that they might not play that move themselves in a game). > >just for the record, the strong players liked it very much, while the weak >players doubted it's soundness... > >cheers > martin As far as I see movei of today has no chance to find it. It can see enough compensation but it evaluates alternatives as better for black and even after Rxf4 exf4 Bd7 it can see only +0.27 for black at depth 15 when the score before Rxf4 was near +0.4 for black. I looked now at older posts about this position and there is something that you said that I disagree about it. You said: "if even the computer sees enough compensation, it probably is more than enough." My response: If this is the case then a simple improvement for the computer is to increase the positional scores. It is not so simple because there are also cases when chess programs overevaluate positional advantage and play wrong sacrifices. Uri
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.