Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 20:28:20 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 John how about something along these lines? 16.Nd5 exd5 17.exd5 g6 18.h4 Nc5 19.Bxc5 dxc5 20.h5 Bd6 21.hxg6 Bxf4+ 22.Kb1 fxg6 23.Rxh7 Qd6 24.Qh1 Be5 25.Qh6 Bf5 26.Rh1.. It's rough but looks strong. Terry
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.