Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Positional/Real Sacrifice

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 14:45:23 11/30/99

Go up one level in this thread


On November 30, 1999 at 04:40:20, Ed Schröder wrote:

>On November 30, 1999 at 04:12:22, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>
>>On November 30, 1999 at 03:35:54, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>
>>>As said we must have a different view on king safety even on the basics as
>>>this case for me is so crystal clear: QRRB all pointed at a naked king, the
>>>king having hardly any escapes,
>>
>>True, but all it takes to wreck the whole thing is ONE escape for the black
>>king, as long as black doesn't lose material doing it.  In this case, I don't
>>think there is an escape, but it will happen in other positions.
>
>And SEARCH will filter that.
>
>Ed

not at 1-2-3 plies it won't.  If you don't see the escape, you make the
sac. If I don't see the win, I don't make it. That is a subtle difference.
You want the search to refute the positional sac.  I want the search to justify
the sac...



>
>>>the black pieces not able to defend its
>>>own king. Based on that Rebel gives a 2 pawn positional bonus after
>>>2.Qxh6 and even more after 3.Bxf5.



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.