I'm no expert, but it seems the computer's suggestion gives black the momentum regardless if there is an exchange or not. On the other hand, b5 weakens the pawns on the queen side and white can take initiative by pressuring them.
Silly Chess Computer!
Sort:
Don't trust the computer, trust your own thoughts, + / - 0,3 - 0,5 doesent mean annything!
-The best move for anny player is a move that suit's his plans, and a move he understand's, to play a computerline that you really don't understand is pointless!
Computer's rest in peace!
skogli wrote:
Don't trust the computer, trust your own thoughts, + / - 0,3 - 0,5 doesent mean annything!
-The best move for anny player is a move that suit's his plans, and a move he understand's, to play a computerline that you really don't understand is pointless!
Computer's rest in peace!
That's dead wrong. Just because someone is a 'tactical player', doesn't mean it's always best to open the position up; if the position calls for you to lock it up and begin a slow positional win, then that's the move you have to play!
SensFan33 wrote:
skogli wrote:
Don't trust the computer, trust your own thoughts, + / - 0,3 - 0,5 doesent mean annything!
-The best move for anny player is a move that suit's his plans, and a move he understand's, to play a computerline that you really don't understand is pointless!
Computer's rest in peace!
That's dead wrong. Just because someone is a 'tactical player', doesn't mean it's always best to open the position up; if the position calls for you to lock it up and begin a slow positional win, then that's the move you have to play!
Sorry but you fail to understand the point!
If you trust your own mind, you learn when you think wrong. If you learn to trust the computer's you play really weak on your own.
Ok, i don't think that the exf6 dxc4 fxg7 Bxg7 line is good for White at all in lieu of Qg4! which immediately seizes a pawn, and I don't think Black has adequate compensation. I would agree that retreating the Bishop after d5 is a sore mistake for it gives Black superior position with an immediate target on e5, but my point is to say that Nf6 is a truly ridiculous move. If Black's intention is to play d5, then why shouldn't he just play d5 right away instead of Nf6, and then White MUST retreat the Bishop.
After d5!, white would either have to accept not being able to castle, (Ba2 dxe4 dxe4 Qxd1+ Kxd1), or allow the c8 bishop a strong open diagonal, with initiative to Black (exd5 exd5 Ba2 Bf5) and threats of a possible c4 pawn advance
Oh and one more thing, the tactical nightmare that ensues after Qg4! cxd3? Qxg7 dxc2? when Black threatens mate on d1 or capture of the knight is no good for Black, in lieu of Qxa8+ Ke7 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Nc3
Silly me! I didn't even spot the Qd4! move which clearly saves the position for Black. And yes, I would say Black has reasonable compensation for the pawn there. White will struggle to play c3, Bf4, Nd2, and then Ne2 and Rf1 when he will finally have a position without much weakness. Unfortunately c3 will create a miserable weakness on b3. I think that line you give is in fact excellent for Black.
But i still feel the immediate d5 to be better than Nf6. I just don't see the point. Nf6 is only "better" than d5 if White plays e5, and Chess isn't meant to be a game where you cross your fingers and hope the guy plays an inferior move. Not at the highest level of play, it isn't. And the funniest part of this all is the crossing-your-fingers-and-hoping-he-won't-see-it method is indubitably human; no computer plays that way.
So what is the solid reason why Nf6 is better than d5, even if we establish that e5 is good for Black?
Ok, I recently submitted a live chess game I played for computer analysis. In it, the computer listed one of my early moves as an inaccuracy (which was not surprising an and of itself, as I am a relatively mediocre chess player). What was interesting was the move it said was my best continuation, to which I can see no point at all. Take a look: