TheResurrectionofTal wrote:
Well, according to my analysis, it isn't as clear as that. White had a winning advantage (...)
It's a pleasure to meet you, Houdini. My name is Irontiger.
Spot the blunder
Sort:
Irontiger wrote:
TheResurrectionofTal wrote:
Well, according to my analysis, it isn't as clear as that. White had a winning advantage (...)
It's a pleasure to meet you, Houdini. My name is Irontiger.
My analysis is that not taking the rook... was a mistake. Why is that not obvious?
Maybe I am a spark in the dark if no one finds this a rather straightforward proposition. What is it that taking a rook be so inconceivable? What defence afterwards? Reach that question after you make the best move!
What's the point of not playing a best move in fear of something... or maybe this is just my chess character coming out. I am ruthless in openings and afraid of no one.
TheResurrectionofTal hat geschrieben:
Irontiger wrote:
TheResurrectionofTal wrote:
Well, according to my analysis, it isn't as clear as that. White had a winning advantage (...)
It's a pleasure to meet you, Houdini. My name is Irontiger.
My analysis is that not taking the rook... was a mistake. Why is that not obvious?
Maybe I am a spark in the light if no one finds this a rather straightforward proposition. What is it that taking a rook be so inconceivable? What defence afterwards? Reach that question after you make the best move!
while Irontiger didn't contribute to the discussion at all, i did. here i post my analysis again...:
what do you say to those variations? do you actually prefer the one where the rook is saved but the a4 pawn is lost?? i think white loses his best counterplay there. with the exchange-sac and two passed pawns white looks much more dangerous to me. sure black is up in material but the passed pawns really make a difference in practical play!
Buntallufigus wrote:
TheResurrectionofTal hat geschrieben:
Irontiger wrote:
TheResurrectionofTal wrote:
Well, according to my analysis, it isn't as clear as that. White had a winning advantage (...)
It's a pleasure to meet you, Houdini. My name is Irontiger.
My analysis is that not taking the rook... was a mistake. Why is that not obvious?
Maybe I am a spark in the light if no one finds this a rather straightforward proposition. What is it that taking a rook be so inconceivable? What defence afterwards? Reach that question after you make the best move!
while Irontiger didn't contribute to the discussion at all, i did. here i post my analysis again...:
what do you say to those variations? do you actually prefer the one where the rook is saved but the a4 pawn is lost?? i think white loses his best counterplay there. with the exchange-sac and two passed pawns white looks much more dangerous to me. sure black is up in material but the passed pawns really make a difference in practical play!
Hi, well it's a bit on the spot. I am not long awake... I'll come back to it soon, see if I would have made any moves different. I need coffee first.
Ok... let's take a look...
This version is about 0.40 points better than the version we were given; this one is worse even for white
WHAT?! i totally disagree. the last position you gave is clearly better for white. wanna play me in unrated online-chess in that position? maybe we can agree, that we can both use engines so we get the right result? ill challenge you. you can decline if you want to ;)
Buntallufigus wrote:
WHAT?! i totally disagree. the last position you gave is clearly better for white.
Sorry, that's what I meant. :)
I just read that back, I wrote that very confusingly haha!
TheResurrectionofTal hat geschrieben:
I just read that back, I wrote that very confusingly haha!
now my head hurts :) so you agree that sacrificing the exchange is sound? do you still want to test it in online play?
TheResurrectionofTal wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
TheResurrectionofTal wrote:
Well, according to my analysis, it isn't as clear as that. White had a winning advantage (...)
It's a pleasure to meet you, Houdini. My name is Irontiger.
My analysis is that not taking the rook... was a mistake. Why is that not obvious?
Maybe I am a spark in the dark if no one finds this a rather straightforward proposition. What is it that taking a rook be so inconceivable? What defence afterwards? Reach that question after you make the best move!
If you cannot see there were reasons to not take the rook, your "analysis" is faulty.
"Take the rook Levon go go go !" is not analysis. Lines are analysis, but you admitted all you knew about it was straight from computer, hence my choking on "your" analysis. But actually, Buntallufigus already said all that in the first page (#18).
Irontiger wrote:
TheResurrectionofTal wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
TheResurrectionofTal wrote:
Well, according to my analysis, it isn't as clear as that. White had a winning advantage (...)
It's a pleasure to meet you, Houdini. My name is Irontiger.
My analysis is that not taking the rook... was a mistake. Why is that not obvious?
Maybe I am a spark in the dark if no one finds this a rather straightforward proposition. What is it that taking a rook be so inconceivable? What defence afterwards? Reach that question after you make the best move!
If you cannot see there were reasons to not take the rook, your "analysis" is faulty.
"Take the rook Levon go go go !" is not analysis. Lines are analysis, but you admitted all you knew about it was straight from computer, hence my choking on "your" analysis. But actually, Buntallufigus already said all that in the first page (#18).
I am not getting into an argument about this with you. I don't feed trolls. You came in here looking for an argument; even someone else pointed out your post wasn't even constructive at all.
see also this analysis by your landsman CM(!!) Tryfon Gavriel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBFme1r1gsA
he agrees, that Kb2 is better than moving the rook in practical play.
I have been playing with Tryfon for about 6 months now. He's a good player.