Author: Alexander Kure
Date: 16:49:44 11/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 1999 at 17:45:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: >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... You cannot justify anything with a 1-2-3 ply search. But after 5-7 plies it should be clear that Bxh6 is winning, providing your king safety/attack is well implemented: 2-3 pawns + dead opponent's king > bishop, but if "dead opponent's king" -> 0 in your evaluation this inequality busts. Nimzo 7.32 for example has a very limited concept of king safety and does not find Bxh6 after 10 plies! Greetings Alex
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.