Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 20:24:59 06/02/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 02, 2005 at 22:46:17, John Merlino wrote: >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 If Terry finds a win for White he will have improved on Kasparov's analysis! I still am not 100% sure that White has totally nothing after this line, but it appears theoreticians poured over the game for months at the time back in the sixties! It was discussed on CSS-forum a while back. Pro Deo Vulcan 1.1 Q1 - Tactical Engine will play the sacrifice by the way but 18.Rde1 does not appear in the PV. Shredder 9 nor any other program I think will play the -bluff?-sacrifice, 16.Ne2 is thought to be the best reply. Fritz 8 reportedly does not see g6, so against some programs it might work! Shredder's analysis after 16.Nd5 exd5 17.exd5: 17...g6 18.Rde1 Bd8 19.Qh3 Ne5 20.Qh6 Bb6 21.Bxe5 dxe5 22.fxe5 Qa7 23.Rhf1 Bf2 24.Re2 Be3+ 25.Kb1 Bg4 26.Ree1 Bh5 -+ -as given by Joachim Rang on CSS-forum- Pro Deo 1.1 Vulcan Q1e - Tactical Engine Athlon 3200+ 00:00:00.3 2,77 2 1366 Bxg7 bxc3 Bxc3 00:00:00.3 1,47 3 1885 Bxg7 bxc3 Bxc3 e5 00:00:00.3 1,71 4 5723 Bxg7 bxc3 Bxc3 Ne5 fxe5 Bxg5+ 00:00:00.3 0,66 5 31004 Bxg7 Kxg7 Ne2 Kg8 Qh5 Bb7 00:00:00.4 1,42 5 52044 Nd5 exd5 Qh5 Ne5 fxe5 dxe5 00:00:00.4 1,28 6 91789 Nd5 exd5 Qh5 Nc5 Rhe1 Nxd3+ Rxd3 00:00:00.5 0,87 7 213351 Nd5 exd5 Qh5 Nc5 Bxg7 dxe4 Bd4 exd3 00:00:00.7 1,39 7 337404 Bxg7 Kxg7 Nd5 exd5 exd5 Kg8 Qe4 Nf6 Qxe7 Nxd5 00:00:01.0 1,28 8 728958 Bxg7 Kxg7 Nd5 exd5 Qh5 Rd8 Rhg1 Kg8 00:00:03.2 1,00 9 2781361 Bxg7 Kxg7 Na4 Rh8 Qh5 Kf8 Qh6+ Kg8 a3 e5 00:00:04.1 1,18 9 3800164 Nd5 exd5 exd5 Ne5 fxe5 Bxg5+ Kb1 dxe5 Rdg1 g6 Bc5 Bf4 00:00:05.9 1,18 10 5760744 Nd5 exd5 exd5 Ne5 fxe5 Bxg5+ Kb1 dxe5 Rdg1 g6 Bc5 Bf4 00:00:12.3 0,94 11 12812050 Nd5 exd5 exd5 g6 Rhe1 Re8 Rd2 Nc5 Bc4 Bf5 Rde2 00:00:49.0 0,85 12 53819733 Nd5 exd5 exd5 g6 Qh3 Re8 Qh6 Bf8 Qh4 Be7 Rhe1 h5 00:02:43.4 0,80 13 183823907 Nd5 exd5 exd5 g6 h4 Nc5 h5 00:03:41.7 0,80 13 251407392 Bxg7 00:08:10.3 0,80 13 183823907 Nd5 exd5 exd5 g6 h4 Nc5 h5 00:12:55.9 1,08 14 879373939 Nd5 exd5 exd5 g6 Rhe1 Re8 Re2 Ne5 fxe5 00:27:37.1 0,97 15 1925494112 Nd5 exd5 exd5 g6 h4 Nc5 h5 Nxd3+ Rxd3 Als Antwort auf: Re: Shredder 9 sieht es gar nicht... geschrieben von Joachim Rang am 21. Mai 2005 08:33:18: >Gibts eine ausführliche Analyse zu der Stellung im Netz, bzw. wie gewinnt Weiß nach 16.Sd5 ed5 17.exd5 g6 ? Google bringt einige Suchtreffer, darunter folgendes Zitat: "Analysts looked at this position for months after, and concluded that g6 was probably black's best defensive resource here." Tja, 1965 hatte man noch keinen Shredder 9 damit wärs schneller gegangen. Das Opfer wird häufig als positionell, spekulativ oder sogar als Bluff beschrieben. Hier gibt Dennis Monokroussos einige Varianten inkl. Bezugnahme auf Kasparov's Werk Great Predecessors an, wo diese Partie also offenbar auch behandelt wurde: http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1115334050.shtml mfg. M.Scheidl Geschrieben von Michael Gurevich am 21. Mai 2005 13:52:23: Als Antwort auf: Re: Shredder 9 sieht es gar nicht... geschrieben von Joachim Rang am 21. Mai 2005 08:33:18: >> >> >> >Selbst wenn ich 16.Sd5 exd5 17.exd5 vorgebe bewertet Shredder 9 auf Tiefe 24 die Stellung als voteilhaft für Schwarz und kommt mit folgender halsbrecherischer Variante: >17...g6 18.Tde1 Ld8 19.Dh3 Se5 20.Dh6 Lb6 21.Lxe5 dxe5 22.fxe5 Da7 23.Thf1 Lf2 24.Te2 Le3+ 25.Kb1 Lg4 26.Tee1 Lh5 -+ >Gibts eine ausführliche Analyse zu der Stellung im Netz, bzw. wie gewinnt Weiß nach 16.Sd5 ed5 17.exd5 g6 ? < Hallo Joachim! In Kasparovs Buch "Meine große Vorgänger, Band II" bezeichnet Garry 17...g6! als einzige Widerlegung des Opfers Sd5. Erstaunlich, dass die Möglichkeit h4-h5 nichts für Weiß danach bringt. (Ich habe 17...g6 nicht gesehen und Fritz 8 auch nicht!). Shredders obige Variante 17...g6 18.Tde1! (am stärksten - Kasparov) Ld8 19.Dh3 Se5! 20.Dh6 Lb6! empfielt Garry als vorteilhaft für Schwarz. Diese Widerlegung wurde erst 2000 gefunden. Nichtsdestotrotz schreibt Garry: "Tal stellte in dieser Partie wieder Probleme, die nach ihrem Schwierigkeitsgrad vorne als die damalige Zeit waren." Und noch: "Hätte anstatt Larsen ein moderner GM seines Niveaus gespielt, meinetwegen Leko, ist es unklar, ob er alle Probleme nach Sd5?! lösen könnte". Als Aufgabe ist diese Stellung ungeeignet. Gruß, Michael
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.