< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Oct-25-03|| ||drukenknight: >>You may have a point, as I might have assumed Fritz's +1.75 appraisal was a winning advantage a bit too quickly.|
See this part I dont get because:
1) it is possible to find lots of drawn games where, at the end, material is different, AND if you go back a few moves sure enuf the computer score will reflect that one side has a plus score.
2) doesnt the computer account for more than just material? yes of course, but it cannot see more 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or whatever it is. Certain issues are just going to elude it.
Nowhere is that more clear than when you're playing some line, it has a very small differential, than in one move, bamm! suddenly its -5.67 or something.
And your like when did that happen? Somewhere between blacks 12th and white's 13th move?
Yeah like in that real little tiny time in between the moves....
No, of course not, it's just the computer catching up to reality due to its limited radar screen.
Of course if a score is negative and continues to get more and more negative.Okay then it probably is all over.
But if a score stays at one level for a long period of moves. Say 5 or 6.
What if a score gets better over a series of moves? Invariably the computer is suddenly seeing some long term potential it did not see earlier.
|Nov-24-04|| ||morphy234: It would be funny if white sacrificed his second rook just for fun! 25. Rg1+ followed by Rg8+. |
|May-04-05|| ||schnarre: Love the finish!!|
|May-12-05|| ||halcyonteam: Nice finish, not hard to guess the finishing repetoire!|
|Oct-19-05|| ||lopium: Yes, nice sacrifice.|
|Jan-13-06|| ||schnarre: Adds insult to injury!|
|Sep-15-06|| ||micartouse: The combination beginning with 22. Qxh6! is similar to Janowski vs Samisch, 1925, with the bishops on the same diagonals, a queen sac on h6, and a rook on the g-file. Very nice! <It would be funny if white sacrificed his second rook just for fun!> No, Black could block the second rook with the queen!|
|Dec-07-08|| ||thebribri8: This is a good Christmastime game; all the Rudolf's.|
|Apr-25-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Oh, deer.|
|Sep-10-10|| ||sevenseaman: Q sacs for a swift win make for a lot of glamor on the chess board but this one is reborn in a matter of two moves. Very pretty!|
|Apr-30-14|| ||Mating Net: As my man <patzer2> stated a long time ago, <Black is busted after 20. g4!> This is the kind of move that I could never even consider playing until I cracked 1500. I would have lunged in with an unsound sacrifice. Instead, 20.g4! dislodges the Knight, when it reaches g5, and enables White to open the g file.|
|Dec-04-14|| ||sls: Wonderful!|
|Feb-08-15|| ||offramp: There's an English opening and a French and a Spanish ... how did the Germans miss out?|
|Feb-08-15|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Well, <offramp>, at least Berlin didn't miss out. Nonetheless, given their 19th Century dominance, you do raise a good question!|
|Feb-08-15|| ||shivasuri4: <offramp>, how about the Berlin Defence, one of the more popular openings (variations?) played today?|
|Feb-08-15|| ||al wazir: 20...Nd5 gives black some hope.|
|Feb-08-15|| ||daveinsatiable: <al wazir> sadly not: 21. Qxe7 1-0|
|Feb-08-15|| ||Smite: crude, and totally unacceptable!|
|Feb-08-15|| ||shivasuri4: <daveinstable>, 21.Qxe7 Nxe7 only serves to defuse the attack.|
<al wazir>, what would Black reply to 20...Nd5 21.g5? I see nothing satisfactory.
|Feb-08-15|| ||daveinsatiable: <shivasuri> Thanks for the correction. I should have known that the error would be mine, not the ever reliable <al wazir>'s.|
|Feb-08-15|| ||shivasuri4: Sorry, I misread your name. Satiable and stable are not even close.|
|Feb-08-15|| ||psmith: <patzer2> <drukenknight> 12 years later... an older version of Rybka recommends 20...Bf3 21. g5 Ng4 22. Bf6! as winning for White...|
|Feb-08-15|| ||morfishine: Here's another master crashing through on the Kingside vs L'Hermet: Saemisch vs L'Hermet, 1927|
|Feb-08-15|| ||al wazir: <shivasuri4: what would Black reply to 20...Nd5 21.g5? I see nothing>.|
21..Kf8, maybe? I admit it doesn't look good for black. But if 22. gxh6, then 22...Qxh5, and now the ♙ has a hard time promoting. (If 23. hxg7, then 23...Kg8. If 23. Bxf7+ or 23. Rxg7, then 23...Ke8.)
<daveinsatiable: ... ever reliable ...>? You must be confusing me with someone else.
|Feb-13-15|| ||shivasuri4: 20...Nd5 21.g5 Kf8 falls to 22.Bxg7+, when the Bishop is taboo (since 22...Kxg7 loses immediately to 23.Qh6+ Kg8 24.Bh7+ with mate to follow). After 22...Ke8 23.Qxh6, Black might as well save himself some trouble by resigning immediately.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·