Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 06:38:59 10/30/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 30, 2005 at 09:29:58, John Jack wrote:
>Fruit 2.2.1 fails two find Rxc3
>1: Pillsbury - Lasker, St Petersburg 1895
>[D]2r2rk1/pp3pp1/4bb1p/q2p1P1Q/3P4/2N5/PP4PP/1K1R1B1R b - - 0 1
>
>Analysis by Fruit 2.2.1:
>
>17...Bd7 18.Qf3 Ba4 19.Rd3 Rc4 20.Be2 Bxd4 21.f6 Bxc3 22.Rxc3 Rxc3 23.Qxc3 Qxc3
>24.bxc3 Re8 25.Bf3 Re5 26.fxg7 Kxg7 27.Kb2 Bd7
> ยต (-1.08) Depth: 16/47 00:02:25 80069k
>
>John E Jack
Hi John
Is it not wrong to blame Fruit 2.2.1 for its
proposal 17...Bd7. As far as I know, Lasker's
nice rook sacrifice 17...Rxc3 is not sufficient
to win the game provided White finds the best
defense. For this reason I firmly believe that
Fruit's 17...Bd7 is fine here and most probably
the best winning try.
Regards
Kurt [http://www.utzingerk.com]
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.