Author: A. Steen
Date: 02:19:38 11/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 2005 at 02:23:08, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 20, 2005 at 19:28:03, A. Steen wrote: > >>On November 20, 2005 at 18:09:46, George Tsavdaris wrote: >> >>>On November 20, 2005 at 17:55:28, Drexel,Michael wrote: >>> >>>>>[D]r6k/p2bq3/np1p1brn/1NpPp1pp/1PP1Pp2/P2Q1P1P/1R3NP1/3BBRK1 b - - 0 26 >>>>> >>>>>Uri, with great respect, in this position 26 .. Ra-g8 is a fine move and made at >>>>>the perfect time (in my opinion). White's pieces (especially the N on b5) are >>>>>not well-placed for a defence on the K-side, and white has not yet begun a pawn >>>>>push on the Q-side. To delay is not wise, white may regroup and bring his >>>>>misplaced N back. >>>> >>>> >>>>Nonsense, to delay would have been _very_ wise. >>>>Black has nothing to fear on the Qeenside and should strive for a quiet >>>>manouvering game, not for an all-out suicidal attack against the Supercomputer. >>> >>> In this case i agree. Although Rag8 looks tempting as it gets all pieces in >>>from of white's King, human should consider that it plays against a computer >>>that sees everything and in wild tactical positions it's not easy or even >>>impossible to outplay it. So a more careful approach was better. >> >>In >> >>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?463219 >> >>I provided a simple analysis to show how black can force a draw. Unfortunately, >>Kasimdzhanov fumbled 8 moves later. >> >>So there is nothing "tempting" about .. Ra-g8. It is a top-class GM move, >>showing that Kasimdzhanov is a top-class GM. > >I do not agree. > >White has no active plan and if the target is forcing a draw then Kg8-h8-g8 is >also enough for a draw. > >The only justification for Rag8 is if it can force a win. > >Uri Thank you for clearly stating your position, which I address directly ignoring everyone else's points. First, against a top-class computer opponent, I repeat that .. Ra-g8 has almost no chance of winning (the computer will surely walk the tightrope of "must find" tactical moves perfectly), and so will lead to the assured draw I demonstrated in the URL (which I notice you do not question or challenge). Kasimdzhanov would probably have thought all this out, of course, and be happy with a draw. But by the same token (HYDRA's speed etc), and given we can't play/test Hydra to find things out for sure, what would HYDRA be able to find if K. just oscillated his king (your suggestion)? I think Hydra would find it must open the Q-side. :) My point is that the position is not sealed or closed, there can be mischief on the a-file (maybe first with the Q and then pawns) and interaction between the knights. These are tactical issues which Kasimdzhanov might wisely not wish to debate OTB with HYDRA. But I deal with specifics soon in the other thread- http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?463119 where your (in this matter) supporter has made concrete move proposals. As always, with chess too much subjective talk is not good, and real positions must be examined. Thanks for keeping the tone higher, unlike some. Best, A.S.
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.