You lie - surely not.
Bloody Hell I'm a genuis - these sacs were acts of desparation before
he got the better position.
Well Well - that's my argument up in air.
If these things are going to prove all my unsound sacs and attacks
are sound then I'm getting one.
Oh no..........please don't tell me the Thing says Rxh7 is the best move?
I have 100's of games like this.
Please don't tell me I play like a computer.... Too much 😳
Rybka analysis please. (and no messing about - the truth!).
I'm actually stunned. (what does humble pie taste like?).
Originally posted by KeplerAnd Fritz only agrees with HIARCS 12, it seems. After about a minute 0.0 is the assessment and there it stays for the next four.
OK, your wish is my command. Not Rybka though, HIARCS 12 on an elderly Mac so this is no super computer.
HIARCS starts off with -6 but that score climbs quite spectacularly. After two minutes the computer's assessment is zero, a flat draw and the score is still climbing, albeit slower than at first. After five minutes the score is +0.05.
By the looks of it you weren't losing at all despite the dimly lit kitchen.
Originally posted by greenpawn34I tried the position before the rook sac and, yes, the box says it is the best move. It takes a long time (over ten minutes) to realise though. As with humans, hindsight is important. Set the thing going on move 16 and it finds Qe4 just about instantly. Back up from there and it just keeps thinking you have a draw.
You lie - surely not.
Bloody Hell I'm a genuis - these sacs were acts of desparation before
he got the better position.
Well Well - that's my argument up in air.
If these things are going to prove all my unsound sacs and attacks
sound then I'm getting one.
Oh no..........please don't tell me the Thing says Rxh7 is the best move?
I have ...[text shortened]... messing about - the truth!).
I'm actually stunned. (what does humble pie taste like?).
Does it go for the Rook sac?
I've just looked at my post.
"The question is.
Tell me where playing a computer is going to assist you in this setting
and in with this type of really god awful - but good for a laugh game. "
Arghhh.....
I showed this game to the lads in the bar afterwards
"...another swindle to add to the Chandler collection."
Have not looked at since - used it because it was played in a kitchen.
ðŸ˜
I have to kill this thread before Diskamly sees it.
Russ is a cheat - Russ is a cheat - Russ is a cheat.
Alert the Mods. Greenpawn has flipped.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Yes, it goes for the rook sac.
Does it go for the Rook sac?
I've just looked at my post.
"The question is.
Tell me where playing a computer is going to assist you in this setting
and in with this type of really god awful - but good for a laugh game. "
Arghhh.....
I showed this game to the lads in the bar afterwards
"...another swindle to add to the Chandler collectio s is a cheat - Russ is a cheat - Russ is a cheat.
Alert the Mods. Greenpawn has flipped.
It is possible you just picked a bad example. Somehow I doubt it. In the settings for HIARCS there is a check box marked "Swindle". Check the box, it looks for tricksy ways to get out of iffy positions. I have seen the thing sac a rook to get a perpetual in the past. That was surprising.
Originally posted by Keplerpossibly picked a bad example.....?
Yes, it goes for the rook sac.
It is possible you just picked a bad example. Somehow I doubt it. In the settings for HIARCS there is a check box marked "Swindle". Check the box, it looks for tricksy ways to get out of iffy positions. I have seen the thing sac a rook to get a perpetual in the past. That was surprising.
and I quote;
"But based on experience....please don't forget the time I've put in
at the chessboard. 36 years must count for something. "
What a dipstick. I actually thought I losing - that's why I sacced.
Have to play more games in dimly lit kitchens.
I'll get another game....
Geoff, if it makes you feel any better, I plugged the rook sac into the free Rybka 2.2 on slow hardware, and it still thinks White's down almost a rook (-4.4) after over 25 minutes. (Working on ply 19, although rumor has it that you should add 2 or 3 plies to the indicated ply depth, because Rybka undercounts the plies.)
Originally posted by greenpawn34The box thinks you were slightly worse before the rook sac, but only about -0.5. In fact HIARCS says your opponent made an error moving Kh8 and giving you the opportunity to sacrifice the rook. The box suggests that Rxf7 would have given black the better position.
possibly picked a bad example.....?
and I quote;
"But based on experience....please don't forget the time I've put in
at the chessboard. 36 years must count for something. "
What a dipstick. I actually thought I losing - that's why I sacced.
Have to play more games in dimly lit kitchens.
I'll get another game....
Originally posted by greenpawn346 seconds to find Ba6 and evaluate it as best at +0.72. After Ba6 the score immediately goes up to +1.48, wiggles about a bit and then settles at +1.46. Bxa6 gets a +2.48 so black should have declined but would still have been losing.
Please look at this one - I played 10.Ba6 because it looked
intereresting and trappy.
Again a serious OTB game 1½ hours 36 moves.
[pgn]
[Event "Match"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1980.??.??"]
[Round "5"]
[White "G. Chandler"]
[Black "R. Austin"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C10"]
[PlyCount "51"]
[EventDate "1980.??.??"]
[EventType "match"]
[EventRounds ...[text shortened]... Qe8+ Rxe8 26. Rxe8[/pgn]
Evaluation before and after 10.Ba6 (please).
Now I know you are kidding me. Is Ba6 the top move in that position?
If you guy have all got together on this It's the best gag ever.
"Remember the day we caught old Greenpawn telling him all his
unsound sacs were sound."
Right I'm going to look for a game where I know I sacced unsoundly
and won.
Database is on another computer (this is works lap top so no serious
chess junk allowed on here).
Next Book....Chandler's Brilliant Sacs - by Chandler & Computer.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Nope, absolutely true. HIARCS took 6 seconds to decide that Ba6 is the best move in that position. The score after Ba6 is now sitting at +1.92 for Bc6 after 12 minutes, Bxa6 is evaluated at +2.40
Now I know you are kidding me. Is Ba6 the top move in that position?
If you guy have all got together on this It's the best gag ever.
"Remember the day we caught old Greenpawn telling him all his
unsound sacs were sound."
Right I'm going to look for a game where I know I sacced unsoundly
and won.
Database is on another computer (this is wo ...[text shortened]... junk allowed on here).
Next Book....Chandler's Brilliant Sacs - by Chandler & Computer.
Last one.
(just playing over some old friends - funny how playing through an
old game can bring back all the memories).
Now this one is dodgy. Missed good moves all over the place.
I'm worse off sac two Knights.
He defends badly, I shun a perpetual, he misses a shot.
I miss a winning move (Qc2) he misses a shot.
In the end I see a trap and he falls for it.
The evaluation thingy will swing up and down on this one.
Again serious OTB game - cannot recall time control.
I remember my opponent saying he had never had a game like
that in his life. I replied "This seems to happen in all my games."
Originally posted by Mad Rookrybka 3 does go for the rook sac at depth twelve, in less than 1 minutes on my computer. I guess rybka dynamic version would be even quicker for these type of things. anyways, it was just an unlucky example 🙂
Geoff, if it makes you feel any better, I plugged the rook sac into the free Rybka 2.2 on slow hardware, and it still thinks White's down almost a rook (-4.4) after over 25 minutes. (Working on ply 19, although rumor has it that you should add 2 or 3 plies to the indicated ply depth, because Rybka undercounts the plies.)
(again) for the record, there are some engines known for speculative and agressive play, and junior is one of them. here's its famous sacrifice against kasparov:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1260279
and this is "rybka 2's immortal", it hangs things allover the place:
for those who are interested, there's a new engine that plays very aggressive a strong enough but speculative style: thinker.
somebody stop me. this is an old game between me and Rybka 2 where she (yes, rybka is a female) makes one of those "real" sacrifices (there's no concrete tactical sequence) against the french, and actually it's a refutation of some unpopular book line. I was feeling comfortably in my "book" (memorization), and was stunned when the sac came:
not that it's extremely educational or something, just wanted to share. here's my notes about the game that I had shared in the rybka forums:
"I must admit, I didn't even think about 14...Kc8 in the game. I thought I would lose the rook anyway (...Kc8 also cannot stop it), so I'd take the queens off and try to defend against the exchange with 14...Qe8, but surprisingly, exchanging the queens is the worst thing black can do there. I thought we were supossed to exchange material when in pressure. chess is really complicated.
edit: oh now I figure. It's all about having time to capture the e pawn. both 14...Qf6 and and 14...Kc8 loses the rook to Nf7, but in the mean time they take away the time from white to play Re1 to protect the pawn. in 14...Kc8 15.Nf7 Nf6, if 16.Re1 then ...Rg8 saves the rook and the game. white has to capture the rook immediately and then the king gets time to capture the pawn. and ind the 14...Qf6 variation, white doesn't have time because black can simply capture the queen. it's very nice tactics actually. "