LordVandheer wrote:
Latvian lost twice in TCEC superfinal season 18. Its busted. Not the point though.
Anyways, my apologies if thats what refutation means. I thought it meant totally losing.
In the amateur database a lot of people are playing like this though.
And now white is totally losing LOL.
We can take a look at TCEC season 15 superfinal. Leela and Stockfish play each other and both games end in a draw. Leelas setup as black actually resembles what you suggest, while Stockfish prefers an early Na5. Results? Both games drawn.
https://www.tcec-chess.com/archive.html?season=15&div=sf&game=51
https://www.tcec-chess.com/archive.html?season=15&div=sf&game=52
I have checked later seasons and Morra hasn't been played again. I don't know why. Maybe it is refuted to a point that its not even shown in the games? I have to ask Matthew Sadler that one. Still, the point stands if top engines of 2019 couldn't manage to dent Morra.
But go ahaed if you wanna argue. In that case, you are either a demigod sandbagging as a 1800 or constipated. My guess is constipated.
It takes a really really bad opening to not be drawn by engines. Chess seems to be a draw with best play, inaccuracies are what cause wins and losses, and the Smith-Morra isn't quite bad enough to be a loss with best play, but it is bad enough to allow Black a small advantage in the opening. That's the definition of 'refuted'. The Latvian is 'refuted' despite it most likely also being a draw with perfect play.
Latvian lost twice in TCEC superfinal season 18. Its busted. Not the point though.
++ Interesting. I suppose that makes sense.
Anyways, my apologies if thats what refutation means. I thought it meant totally losing.
++ That's what I've always been told, but I don't know for sure.