Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:04:04 10/04/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 04, 2004 at 13:54:46, Daniel Jackson wrote: >On October 04, 2004 at 10:33:00, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 04, 2004 at 09:28:28, Daniel Jackson wrote: >> >>>On October 04, 2004 at 02:07:12, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On October 04, 2004 at 01:12:58, Daniel Jackson wrote: >>>> >>>>>CM10 Default on a slow PIII 500 can't hold Black's position, even before Kramnik >>>>>made errors. >>>>> >>>>>I don't trust CM10 to handle this endgame, still it does show that 15..a6 >>>>>followed by 16.Bxa6 is better for White and is difficult to defend. >>>>>BTW CM10 couldn't find 16.Bxa6, I had to manually input the moves, then set it >>>>>to autoplay. If there is a draw, I'll have to start at 24.gxf3 or even earlier. >>>>>This exchange to the endgame isn't particularly good. It may be down right >>>>>terrible!? >>>> >>>>Can you show the way that chessmaster beat itself after 62...Be1 >>>>People claimed in another thread that Kramnik could save a draw by 62...Be1 and >>>>I saw no contradiction. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>The point is the line is a bit risky...what's the point to say this move draws, >>>when it is a position no one in their right mind would want to defend? >> >>Why do you say noone? >> >>If a player is strong in endgames he may prefer to defend inferior endgame and >>not play the middlegame. >> >>Uri > >That's not the point....the point is Don't Play Inferior Lines and Chess, >period! Kramnik must have known the dangers, that is arrogance if he believes he >can win the match with his endgame technique alone. > >He risks losing match! It seems that Kramnik simply does not know to play endgames well enough but if a player knows to play endgames well enough then there is no danger. The fact that kramnik may lose the match is a good thing because I have reasons not to like kramnik. 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.