Author: James T. Walker
Date: 06:00:35 11/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2005 at 00:35:06, chandler yergin wrote:
>On November 19, 2005 at 19:12:14, James T. Walker wrote:
>
>>As usual you fail to grasp the situation.
>Obviously you do, not me.
>
>141. Kg2 {0} Qb6 {-6.14/1 0} Too complicated for you?
>
> Of course Bh7+ loses the Bishop. But
>>is it for nothing?
>Yes, gives Black a huge advantage.
>
>
> What move saves the Bishop and draws the game?
>Nothing!
>White has been lost after the Bad Sac.
>Check the PV Evals for Black,
>
>>Jim
Well you certainly prove my point. You are clueless as to what the game was all
about. Please read Pablos message below. He explains what I was trying to
point out to you but again you fail to grasp. The only purpose of this style of
play is to draw the game by 3xrep or 50 move rule or in best case win on time by
making quick mindless moves untill the computer runs out of time. (Shuffling the
king back and fourth)
Since you didn't answer my questions correctly it proves you don't know what the
game is all about. Sacing the Bishop did not lose the Bishop. It was already
lost. Sacing the Bishop simply avoided opening lines by playing Bxp or allowing
pxB which could be fatal when playing an opponent 600 + points above your
rating. It was an ingenious way of keeping the defense intact and preserving
the chances of drawing/winning the game. Your statement "White has been lost
after the Bad Sac" again proves my point. Nobody above a 1200 elo needs a
computer analysis to see white is down material after the "Bad Sac" you pointed
to.
By the way did you check the result? It was a draw. Not a loss as you claim.
Mission accomplished!
I'm not defending this style of chess but at least I understand what is
happening.
Jim
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.