Author: John Merlino
Date: 19:46:17 06/02/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 02, 2005 at 22:41:14, John Merlino wrote: >On June 02, 2005 at 22:30:27, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On June 02, 2005 at 22:09:13, John Merlino wrote: >> >>>On June 02, 2005 at 19:53:39, ludicrous wrote: >>> >>>>The first one is: >>>> >>>>[D]2bqkb1r/1r1n1ppp/p3p3/np6/4PB2/2N2NP1/P1Q2PBP/3R1RK1 w k - 0 16 >>>> >>>>White to move. Umansky played Nd5!! >>> >>>This looks like a sound sacrifice. However, CM9_R1 does not find it on an AMD >>>2500 in under three minutes. >>> >>>>The next is: >>>> >>>>Tal Mikhail (LAT) - Larsen Bent (DEN) [B82] >>>>Ch World match (1/2) Bled (Yugoslavia), 10.03.1965 >>>> >>>>[D]rqb2rk1/3nbppp/p2pp3/6P1/1p1BPP2/2NB1Q2/PPP4P/2KR3R w - - 0 16 >>>> >>>>Tal played 16. Nd5! >>> >>>But THIS looks like one of those infamous Tal "sacrifices" that did nothing more >>>than put the fear of God into his opponent. The King prefers many different >>>moves for Black other than the ones that Larsen played: >>> >>>17...g6 (score of -1.25) instead of 17...f5 (-0.50) >>>18...Bd8 (score of -1.94) instead of 18...Rf7 (-1.05) >>>19...Nc5 (score of -1.27) instead of 18...Bb7 (+0.75) >>> >>>Of course, this requires more intense analysis, but the early verdict is that >>>Tal stole another one.... :-) >>> >>>jm >> >>John the sac is sound, you can't take the Night without risk and if it lives it >>wins. If you mess with this long enough and go deep enough White's pieces are >>too much for Black's King. Maybe you can muster a defence, but it will be tough. >> >>Don't trust the King program that much...it fails to grasp sacs like Nxe6! in >>the Carro-Kann. >> >>1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dc 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Bd3 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 7.Nf3 h6? 8.Nxe6! >> >>This test might be better suited for Junior or Rebel:) >> >>Terry >> >>The King is badly confused by this sac. > >Well, I can't argue with you there. > >But just because The King doesn't find one (or two) sacs doesn't mean that those >sacs are necessarily sound. As I pointed out in my follow-up, apparently this >jury is still out on this move. > >All I was saying was that there is possibly a way that Black could have >"mustered a defense", starting with 16...g6 instead of 16...f5. > >jm Yet another follow-up... :-) First of all, it should be 17...g6 instead of 16...g6 above. I should also have included playing 18...Bd8 instead of 18...Rf7. So, the whole line I suggest, starting with the sac, is 16.Nd5 exd5 17.exd5 g6 18.Rde1 Bd8, and Black has solidified rather than ran forward and started exchanging pieces and allowing White a big attack. jm
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.