< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Oct-24-03|| ||chessgames.com: "Full credit" for either answer. |
|Oct-24-03|| ||Honza Cervenka: 22.Bf6 Nxf6 23.gxf6 or 22.Bh7+ Kxh7 23.g6+ would have been sufficient too. |
|Oct-24-03|| ||DexterGordon: After 22. Bh7+ if 22...Kf8 then 23. Bxg7+ seems to do it! |
|Oct-24-03|| ||drukenknight: Gee whiz only 3 solutions? how about four? There must be something really messed up here. What about 20...Bf3 doesnt this help alot? |
|Oct-24-03|| ||shyleech: Ok well I've got a few questions. If 22. Bxf7, Nf8...doesn't 23. Qxh6 lead to a win? The knight would fall to the white bishop and white wins. I think Ne5 might work to save the King even though pieces would be lost. If White's black bishop takes the Knight, the King could then run f8, e8, d7. If the Knight is allowed to move to g6, then taking it with White's white bishop opens up f7 for escape. If 22. Bf6 I'm thinking h6xg5 instead of Nxf6. What do you all think? Am I sleep deprived? |
|Oct-24-03|| ||Honza Cervenka: <If 22. Bf6 I'm thinking h6xg5 instead of Nxf6.>|
22.Bf6 hxg5 23.Qh7+ Kf8 24.Qh8#
|Oct-24-03|| ||Alyosha Karamazov: <drukenknight - Gee whiz only 3 solutions? how about four?> Indeed. 22. Bd6 Qxd6 23. gxh6 seems to be yet another possibility |
|Oct-24-03|| ||patzer2: <Drukenknight> <Gee whiz only 3 solutions? how about four?> Oh well, why not? Let's go instead for five solutions! Fritz 8 gives (@ 14/45 depth & 713kN/s):|
(+13.22) 22. Bxg7! validating <Alchemist>'s and <Crafty>'s analysis.
(+10.72) 22. Qxh6! gxh6 23. gxh6+ Qg5+ (better resistance than 23. ..Kf8, as played in this game) 24. Rxg5+ Kf8 25. Bd6+ Ke8 26. h7 Nb6 27. h8Q+ Kd7 28. Qd6 Kc8 29. Bh7 Nd5 30. Qe5 c3
(+9.91) 22. Bf6! (<Honza Cervenka>'s suggestion) 22. ..cxd3 23. Bxe7 h5 24. Rxd3 g6 25. Bxd8 Rxd8 26. Rd6 Rc8 27. Qd4 Bb7
(+7.25) 22. Bh7+! (<DexterGordon>'s suggestion) 22. ..Kxh7 23. g6+ fxg6 24. Qxe7 Nxe5 25. Rxd8 Rxd8 26. Qxd8 Bd5 27. Qc7 Nf3
(+6.16) 22. Bd6! Qxd6 [If 22. ..Qe8, then 23. gxh6 g6 24. h7+ Kh8 25. Rg3 Bg2 (to prevent 26. Rh3) 26. Bxc4 Rdc8 27. Rxg2 a6 28. Rg3 Rc6 29. Qd4+ f6 wins for white] 23. Bh7+ Kxh7 24. Rxd6 Bd5 25. gxh6 g6 26. Qe7 Kxh6 27. Rxd7 Rxd7 28. Qxd7 Kg7 29. b3 Kg8 (@15/42 depth and 722k/Ns)
|Oct-24-03|| ||Alyosha Karamazov: Dang! Thanks patzer2. Anyone who got all 5 on their own should get a free ice cream cone or something. |
|Oct-24-03|| ||shyleech: Ok so if Bf6, does g6 save the mate? |
|Oct-24-03|| ||patzer2: <Shyleech> 22. Bf6 g6 23. BxQe7 and white wins. |
|Oct-24-03|| ||patzer2: <Drukenknight> Black is busted after 20. g4! While 20...Bf3 puts up the best possible resistance in this position, black still loses.|
Fritz analyzes 20. ..Bf3 21. g5 Ng4 22. Rxg4 Bxg4 23. Qxg4 Qxg5+ 24. Qxg5 hxg5 25. Bc7 Rd7 26. c4 Rd4 27. b4 cxb4 28. Bh7+ Kxh7 with a white winning advantage (+1.75 @ 14/40 depth & 716kN/s).
|Oct-24-03|| ||drukenknight: yeah well Fritz puts the R on d7 and then has to move him twice due to a discovered attack.|
25...Rd4 looks to be balanced.
|Oct-24-03|| ||patzer2: <drukenknight> You may have a point, as I might have assumed Fritz's +1.75 appraisal was a winning advantage a bit too quickly. Your recommendation of 20...Bf3 is the best move in a bad position, and does offer black some chances for a draw. It is possible Fritz overestimated the advantage of the two bishops versus the rook in this position. While I would not go so far as to call the position "balanced," I would agree that against human competition forcing a win would be difficult -- and that your continuation offers excellent chances for a draw. On the other hand, having seen Fritz 8's awesome tactical and end game capabilities, I wouldn't be surprised if Fritz pulled off a win with best play here. |
By the way, I recorded white's 25th move incorrectly earlier. The correct sequence should have been 20. ..Bf3 21. g5 Ng4 22. Rxg4 Bxg4 23. Qxg4 Qxg5+ 24. Qxg5 hxg5 25. Bc7 Rd5 (not 25...Rd7 as I recorded earlier) 26. c4 Rd4 27. b4 cxb4 28. Bh7+ Kxh7 with a white advantage (+1.75 @14/40 depth & 716kN/s).
In addition, I had Fritz reanalyze the position after 24. ..hxg5 in this sequence for a deeper look. This time Fritz gives the line as 20. g4 Bf3 21. g5 Ng4 22. Rxg4 Bxg4 23. Qxg4 Qxg5+ 24. Qxg5 hxg5 25. f4 gxf4 26. Rg1 g6 27. Be4 Rab8 28. Bf6 Kf8 29. Rg4 Rdc8 30. Rxf4 Ke8 31. Rh4 Rb6 (+1.66 @17/37 depth & 700kN/s).
Now, after Fritz's analysis of best play as 32. c4 e5 33. Bxe5, white is starting to have some winning chances and the assessment moves up (+2.44 @16/36 depth & 784kN/s).
|Oct-24-03|| ||drukenknight: Ummmm, a couple of thoughts.
First, thanks for putting this into a machine and doing so much work on it.
2nd. I am not at all sure what blacks 20th move should be, one can sure mess it up as black though..
3rd. We crank out mountains of analysis and yet I feel it is much more important to understanding chess to be able to spot the one big mistake (or more than one??) So far neither us humans nor Fritz has been able to say "see here, here is the mistake.."
So to my way of thinking we can either save it on move 20 or we cannot and have to start over. SInce we are in correspondence/metal monster mode, I take it as a given that we are playing against a computer and will try to save it that way.
Obviously if it was humans, yeah this would be even harder to play.
|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!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·