30 Sep 07
2 edits
Originally posted by KatonahAs it mentioned, anyone can try differnt settings against a engine (anyone in my level or even lower will think of Rook sacrifise and see what can come after), Rxg2 and see how it goes after, which is Queen sacrfise.
Lets face it, for all the buzz that this game has generated, it took the opponents "bad" moves to make it happen. So lets not throw too many accolades. For a brilliancy to happen someone has to make a mistake!! The rook sac was speculative, without merit and it happened to work out in the end. Why are the computers not finding this, because of the very fact game as a one off, it is not a brilliant game it just happened to work to the winners favor !
I cant think this is a play of 1800
- LoLLe
30 Sep 07
Originally posted by KatonahNo, the sacrifice Rxg2 was correct and in all lines analyzed by me I was getting advantage: at least piece+p+activity versus R...after tha game when I used a computer to check it it proved that the R sack was sound and correct.
Lets face it, for all the buzz that this game has generated, it took the opponents "bad" moves to make it happen. So lets not throw too many accolades. For a brilliancy to happen someone has to make a mistake!! The rook sac was speculative, without merit and it happened to work out in the end. Why are the computers not finding this, because of the very fact ...[text shortened]... game as a one off, it is not a brilliant game it just happened to work to the winners favor !
For those with computer use accusations: just please check the whole game(before Rxg2) with an engine and notice that several of my moves were inferior to computer's sugestion...
01 Oct 07
Originally posted by vipiuAs a thought, how would you have handled 21. ... Qxb7 22. Kg1. ?
No, the sacrifice Rxg2 was correct and in all lines analyzed by me I was getting advantage: at least piece+p+activity versus R...after tha game when I used a computer to check it it proved that the R sack was sound and correct.
For those with computer use accusations: just please check the whole game(before Rxg2) with an engine and notice that several of my moves were inferior to computer's sugestion...
You're still winning, though.
01 Oct 07
Originally posted by cedersI don't see why he's defending himself. There's no reason to. Just report each accusation as they come and shut people up. The simple style of play dictates that he didn't cheat in other moves that game. Engine analysis has revealed that he didn't cheat to find that particular sacrifice. And personal (and I'm sure mod) analysis has shown that he hasn't cheated in any of his other games. Is that not enough?
i think you should take all these accusations as a compliment.
02 Oct 07
Originally posted by buffalobillafter Qb7 Kg1 Qxf3 I will get that position I was talking about...with piece+pawn+activity vs rook...and I think black is better...actually this was the main line in my opinion until I saw his Bg3 reply and I thought Rxg2 doesn't work because of it...but after that I saw Qxf3 wins anyway(as on Kxf3 the whole that long line mate is forced)...
As a thought, how would you have handled 21. ... Qxb7 22. Kg1. ?
You're still winning, though.
anyway, the Q sacks are not difficult to see these days when all the problems are about Q sacks 🙂
24 Dec 07
Originally posted by Fat Ladyfinding the queen sac on the move it should be played isn't hard...finding it a few moves before is the hard part...beautiful game vipiu! 🙂
I won't accuse you of cheating... but that queen sac really was wonderful and frankly a bit too good to be true. If you genuinely found it yourself then I salute you.
24 Dec 07
1 edit
Originally posted by tomtom232That rook sacrifice is nothing less than Tal-like genius. If you put a group of GMs and super-GMs in a room, and told them they're watching a game between two famous GMS and asked to call the moves as they were played, I think they would literally choke when they saw that rook sacrifice. And unlike Tals rook sacrifices, this one turned out be 100% positionally sound!!
finding the queen sac on the move it should be played isn't hard...finding it a few moves before is the hard part...beautiful game vipiu! 🙂
Seriously, if this was a Kramnik versus Fritz game, this would have been the top story on chessbase news.
25 Dec 07
1 edit
I find the final position remarkable:
A couple of things that blow my mind:
1) Every remaining black piece is part of the attack including the undeveloped rook and bishop!
2) Black completely dominates the centre with pawns. White hardly looks like it got off the starting block at all. I can't remember ever seeing another game that looked so much like the king was kindnapped by chess zombies and dropped into enemy territory. Even if this was two masters playing, I would consider this one of the greatest king-fishing games I've ever seen.
25 Dec 07
This game reminds me of an attack an IM, Josh Waitzkin, did when he played and beat his first master. I'll try and find the game later if you don't know what I'm talking about.
If I remember correctly he did a Rook and Queen sac, and ran the opponents King up the board
26 Dec 07
Originally posted by Best101Yes, I remember that from Chessmaster 9000, where Waitzkin walks you through that game (and many others).
This game reminds me of an attack an IM, Josh Waitzkin, did when he played and beat his first master. I'll try and find the game later if you don't know what I'm talking about.
If I remember correctly he did a Rook and Queen sac, and ran the opponents King up the board
The game is also here:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1328833
I think vipiu's game was more amazing though. Waitzkin's rook sac was leaving the rook behind to be taken, not throwing it across the board with abandon with no obvious continuation. Waitzkin knew that if the rook sac was taken, the queen sac was part of a single tactic that led to forced mate. In vipiu's game, an uncertain intervening move after Kxg2 had to be factored in.
Also, Waitzkin's sac could have been declined with 25...Rg8 giving black a dangerous but playable game. Black's solid pawn formation in that game was nothing like the pawn dominance that made vipiu's mate possible.
What makes Waitzkin's game more amazing though was that he was 10 years old. 🙂