Author: Albert Silver
Date: 07:41:43 10/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 03, 1999 at 09:32:47, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On October 03, 1999 at 04:42:40, Ed Schröder wrote:
>
>>>Posted by Lawrence S. Tamarkin on October 03, 1999 at 02:48:13:
>>>
>>>Congratulations to Rebel Century on its win against GM Scherbakov. We here at
>>>the Marshall Chess Club Salute you! (I may just set up some match in the club,
>>>involving an IM or GM, just for fun, but especially if Rebel company (Ed),
>>>wants to draw a player from the NY chess mecca...
>>
>>You know I am always in for a challenge. And the Marshall Chess Club is
>>quite a name to remember.
>>
>>>This makes me more excited about getting Rebel Century & studying with it (I
>>>have long ago stopped playing with these programs), various positions out of
>>>chess books, and my tournament games. Bigger book, custem levels, more
>>>training features, test positons, utilities, etc, etc. It is definately a fantastic
>>>bargain, that we (I), look forward too.
>>
>>Don't tell me about it. The data on the cd is 620 Mb. It was quite difficult to
>>decide what should be left out as the limit is 640 Mb. How can one handle that
>>in one year? I wonder. Seems to me DVD has the future and will be required
>>within 2-3 years.
>>
>>>I hope Rebel Century will keep winning (No GM has yet lost in 30 moves or less
>>>to it:)), and that the GM's pride will keep them coming back for more, rather
>>>than fear scaring them away!
>>
>>We shortly discussed the possibility of a re-match. In principal we agreed to
>>that but of course we have to figure out the details in email first.
>>
>>About the game: I am pretty impressed by the attacking style. It sacrifices
>>a piece for a promising king attack. Then later counting the pieces on the
>>board Rebel is behind a full rook. Still it shows +3.xx, a dream game.
>>
>>Ed
>
>
>Rebel played well, obviously. However this is _not_ a sac. A sac is where you
>give up material for positional gain. This is a pure tactical combination as
>it wins more material than it gives up...
>
Of course this all depends on the reasons for Rebel giving up the material in
the first place. Objectively you're right of course, but if Rebel gave up
material in a situation where it could NOT see the return of it's sacs but
rather for reasons pertaining to positional elements (king highly exposed, or
whatever) then it was a sac. If on the other hand it went into the line
calculating the whole combination then yes, it was just (however nice) a
combination. Ed can clear that up by giving us the eval and the main line when
it went into it.
Albert Silver
>
>>
>>>Larry - the chess software addict!
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.