leavenfish wrote:I don't think Aronian would consider ...Re5 'blundering a piece' as anything akin to 'style'.
It's...lets just say 'lazy thinking' to think of Re5 as being a product of style....and I all too often see people point to such moves and shout "style!".....but a bad move is just a bad move.
When Tal played 21...Nf4 in the following game, it led GM Bryan Smith (ironic name, right?) to say:
21... Nf4! Much has been written about this sacrifice, and there has been a lot of analysis by various commentators, either refuting it or vindicating it. I don't intend to do any of that, but rather just to present the game. In any case, this sacrifice is the only continuation to Black's play . Otherwise, in view of the threat of 22.g4, Black would have to begin a general retreat, and allow White to gain a clear advantage by occupying e4. So if the sacrifice is unsound, it is Black's previous play, not the move itself, whicih should be questioned.
(Source: https://www.chess.com/article/view/clas ... -botvinnik )
Huh? A GM said that an unsound sacrifice is the "only way to continue"?
I thought as "bad move is just a bad move"?
[pgn][Event "Tal - Botvinnik World Championship Match"]
[Site "Moscow URS"]
[White "Mikhail Botvinnik"]
[Black "Mikhail Tal"]
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 O-O 5.d4 d6 6.Nc3 Nbd7 7.O-O
e5 8.e4 c6 9.h3 Qb6 10.d5 cxd5 11.cxd5 Nc5 12.Ne1 Bd7 13.Nd3
Nxd3 14.Qxd3 Rfc8 15.Rb1 Nh5 16.Be3 Qb4 17.Qe2 Rc4 18.Rfc1
Rac8 19.Kh2 f5 20.exf5 Bxf5 21.Ra1 Nf4 22.gxf4 exf4 23.Bd2
Qxb2 24.Rab1 f3 25.Rxb2 fxe2 26.Rb3 Rd4 27.Be1 Be5+ 28.Kg1 Bf4
29.Nxe2 Rxc1 30.Nxd4 Rxe1+ 31.Bf1 Be4 32.Ne2 Be5 33.f4 Bf6
34.Rxb7 Bxd5 35.Rc7 Bxa2 36.Rxa7 Bc4 37.Ra8+ Kf7 38.Ra7+ Ke6
39.Ra3 d5 40.Kf2 Bh4+ 41.Kg2 Kd6 42.Ng3 Bxg3 43.Bxc4 dxc4
44.Kxg3 Kd5 45.Ra7 c3 46.Rc7 Kd4 47.Rd7+ 0-1[/pgn]
It seems that for real chessplayers outside the gaze of a perfect chess entity, there is more than just black and white.
And that's why we find engines that play like this interesting.