Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderator: Ras

User avatar
AdminX
Posts: 6363
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: Acworth, GA

Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by AdminX »

In the Kings Tournament we saw two knight sacs the other day. In Shirov - Ivanchuk, Shirov's Sac was in reply to Ivanchuk's novelty in the Rossolimo Variation where white gained good attacking chances. While in Gelfand - Nisipeanu, it was Nisipeanu who with black used a knight sac to gain good attcking chances in the Kings Indain. In the end neither Sac bought home the bacon. :cry:


Shirov,A - Ivanchuk,V, Kings' Tournament 2009
Position before white plays 12. Nxb7!
[d]2kr1b1r/1pq2ppp/p1p1p3/2N1P3/1nPP2b1/5N2/PP3PPP/R1BQ1RK1 w - - 0 12

Analysis by Rybka 3:

12.Nb3 c5 13.Bg5 Rd7 14.h3 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 cxd4 16.a3 Nc6
+/= (0.60) Depth: 6 00:00:00 5kN
= (0.10) Depth: 8 00:00:00 60kN

12.Nxb7 Bxf3 13.gxf3[] Qxb7 14.a3
+/= (0.28) Depth: 8 00:00:00 74kN
= (0.04) Depth: 12 00:00:03 421kN

12.Nb3 c5 13.Bg5 Rd7 14.Re1 cxd4 15.Re4 Bxf3 16.Qxf3 Nc6 17.Qg3 h6 18.Bd2 g5 19.Rd1 Kb8 20.Nc1 Ne7 21.Qb3 Bg7 22.Nd3 Qc6 23.f3 Rc8
= (0.11) Depth: 12 00:00:04 594kN
= (0.08) Depth: 20 00:05:42 54438kN


Gelfand,B - Nisipeanu,L, Kings' Tournament 2009
Position before black plays 21. ... Nxe4!?
[d]r1bq1rk1/1p4b1/1N1p1nn1/P2Pp2p/4Ppp1/BN3P2/4B1PP/R2QR1K1 b - - 0 21

Analysis by Rybka 3:

21...Rxa5 22.Nxa5 Qxb6+[] 23.Kh1[] Nh4 24.Nc4 Qf2 25.Rg1[] gxf3 26.Bxf3 Bg4 27.Rf1 Bxf3[] 28.Qxf3 Qc2 29.Rac1 Qxc1 30.Qd3 Qxf1+[] 31.Qxf1 Nxe4 32.Qe1 b5 33.Nxd6 Nxd6 34.Bxd6 Rc8 35.Ba3 Nf5 36.d6 Rc4
+/- (0.87) Depth: 6 00:00:00 2kN
+/- (1.08) Depth: 19 00:10:45 101mN

Game commentary By GM Dorian Rogozenco

[Event "Kings' Tournament"]
[Site "Bazna ROM"]
[Date "2009.06.15"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Shirov, Alexei"]
[Black "Ivanchuk, Vassily"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B30"]
[PlyCount "129"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. Nc3 Qc7 5. O-O a6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. e5 Nd5 8.
Ne4 Bg4 {In this variation Black is ready to sac the pawn c5 in order to build
a pressure on White's center.} 9. c4 {A rare move, played only once before.} ({
The main continuation is} 9. Nxc5 {Then after} e6 10. Nd3 Rd8 {Black has a
good compensation for the pawn.}) 9... Nb4 {This is a new move. In the only
available game Black retreated the knight to b6.} 10. d4 O-O-O 11. Nxc5 e6 {#}
12. Nxb7 {Fire on board! The move is good, but as stated by Alexey after the
game he miscalculated something. White's idea is to destroy opponent's pawn
formation and then to catch opponent's knight on b4.} Qxb7 13. a3 Bxf3 14. gxf3
{#} (14. Qxf3 $2 Nc2 {and Black saves the knight}) 14... Rxd4 {A counter-sac
by Ivanchuk! The Ukrainian is not willing to hand the initiative over to his
opponent.} 15. Qxd4 Nc2 16. Qd3 {This move is based on a miscalculation.} ({
Correct was} 16. Qc3 Nxa1 17. b4 c5 18. Bd2 {and here Ivanchuk was going to
play} Be7 {(another option is to take everything on b4 and then play Nc2)} 19.
Rxa1 Rd8 {with compensation for the pawn}) 16... Nxa1 17. b4 ({Here Shirov
noticed that the planned} 17. Bg5 {runs into} f6 18. exf6 gxf6 19. Bxf6 Bg7 $1
20. Bxg7 Qxg7+ {with check!}) 17... Be7 18. Bb2 Rd8 19. Qc3 Qd7 $1 20. Rxa1 Qd2
21. Qxd2 Rxd2 22. Bc1 ({After} 22. Bc3 Rc2 23. Bd4 Rxc4 {Black enjoys the
advantage with equal material.}) 22... Rd1+ 23. Kg2 {# In spite of being a
pawn down Black has the advantage.} c5 (23... Bh4 $5) 24. b5 axb5 25. cxb5 c4 (
25... Bg5 {brings nothing due to} 26. Bb2 Rd2 27. Bc1 {and Black must repeat
the position.}) 26. a4 c3 27. a5 Bg5 28. f4 $1 {Great defense by Shirov. He
needs the bishop on f4 in order to attack it later with the rook.} Bxf4 29. a6
Rxc1 30. Ra4 $1 {Now Black is forced to return the extra piece.} Kb8 (30... Bg5
{loses obviously after} 31. a7) 31. Rxf4 Rb1 32. Rxf7 c2 33. b6 Rxb6 34. a7+
Ka8 35. Rc7 Rb2 {Diagram 4} 36. Kg3 g6 37. h4 h6 38. f3 Ra2 39. Kg4 Rb2 40. f4
Ra2 41. h5 g5 42. fxg5 Ra4+ 43. Kf3 Ra3+ 44. Ke4 Ra4+ 45. Kd3 hxg5 46. Rxc2 Rh4
47. Rc8+ Kxa7 48. Rh8 Kb6 49. h6 Kc6 50. h7 Kb7 51. Ke3 Ka7 52. Kf3 Rf4+ 53.
Kg3 Rh4 54. Re8 Rxh7 55. Kg4 Kb7 56. Rxe6 Kc7 57. Ra6 Rh1 58. Rd6 Re1 59. Kf5
g4 60. Rd3 g3 61. Rxg3 Kd7 62. Rg7+ Ke8 63. Ke6 Kf8 64. Rf7+ Ke8 65. Rf2
1/2-1/2

[Event "Kings' Tournament"]
[Site "Bazna ROM"]
[Date "2009.06.15"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Gelfand, Boris"]
[Black "Nisipeanu, Liviu Dieter"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E97"]
[PlyCount "71"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]

1. d4 d6 2. Nf3 g6 3. c4 Bg7 4. e4 Nf6 5. Nc3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5
Ne7 9. b4 Nh5 10. Re1 a5 11. bxa5 f5 12. Nd2 Nf6 13. c5 Rxa5 14. Nb3 Ra8 15. f3
f4 16. a4 g5 17. Ba3 h5 18. a5 Ng6 19. cxd6 cxd6 20. Na4 g4 21. Nb6 {#} Nxe4 $1
{"A brilliant sacrifice" (Gelfand)} 22. fxe4 {Just few other variations to
show how dangerous is Black's attack:} (22. Qc2 Qh4 23. fxe4 ({or} 23. Qxe4 Bf5
24. Qb4 e4) 23... g3 24. h3 Bxh3 25. gxh3 f3 26. Bxf3 Rxf3 27. Rf1 Raf8) (22.
Nxa8 Nf2 $1 {#[Analysis diagram]} 23. Kxf2 (23. Qc2 g3 24. Qxg6 Qh4 25. h3 Bxh3
) 23... Qh4+ 24. Kg1 g3 25. h3 Bxh3 {in all these variations Black is winning})
22... f3 (22... g3 $2 {doesn't work in view of} 23. Bxh5 Qh4 24. h3 Bxh3 25.
gxh3 Qxh3 26. Ra2) 23. Rf1 ({After other moves White is in troubles:} 23. Nxa8
f2+ 24. Kh1 g3 $1) ({Or} 23. gxf3 gxf3 24. Bxf3 Nh4 25. Nd2 Bh3 26. Qe2 Rxa5
27. Nbc4 Ra4 28. Rac1 Nxf3+ 29. Nxf3 Bg4 30. Rf1 b5) 23... Nf4 24. Bxf3 $1 ({
Gelfand's move is much safer than} 24. gxf3 Qg5 25. fxg4 Nh3+ 26. Kh1 Nf2+ 27.
Rxf2 Rxf2) 24... gxf3 25. Rxf3 Bg4 26. Nxa8 {#} Qxa8 $2 {A pity. Instead of
this Black had two attractive options:} (26... Nh3+ 27. Rxh3 (27. Kf1 Bxf3 28.
gxf3 Qg5 {is winning for Black}) 27... Bxd1 28. Rxd1 Qc8 $1 29. Rc1 Qxa8 30.
Bxd6 Rf4 {with unclear position, where from the practical point of view it
might be easier to play White}) ({Therefore stronger is} 26... Nxg2 $1 27.
Rxf8+ Bxf8 28. Qf1 Nf4 29. Ra2 Qg5 30. Kh1 Qg6 {with excellent compensation
for the exchange.}) 27. Bxd6 Rf7 28. Qf1 $1 Qd8 ({The last attempt to
complicate matters was} 28... h4 {although objectively White is winning.}) ({
After} 28... Bxf3 29. gxf3 $1 {Black is lost as well} ({Not} 29. Qxf3 $2 Qa6 {
attacking bishop d6 and threatening a check on e2.})) 29. Bc5 {# Now White is
winning.} Bf8 30. Rf2 Qh4 31. Kh1 Ne2 32. Rxf7 Ng3+ 33. Kg1 Bxc5+ 34. Nxc5 Ne2+
35. Qxe2 Bxe2 36. Rf2 1-0
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9773
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb »

With all due respect to the super Grandmasters,the two sacrifices are totaly,and I mean totaly unsound....I wish the chess engines that I play make such sacrifices....unfortunately they don't....
Dr.D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
User avatar
AdminX
Posts: 6363
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: Acworth, GA

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by AdminX »

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:With all due respect to the super Grandmasters,the two sacrifices are totaly,and I mean totaly unsound....I wish the chess engines that I play make such sacrifices....unfortunately they don't....
Dr.D
With all due respect to you Dr D, I think the Shirov Sac might be okay. I don't know about the other one (Nisipeanu) however, I have strong doubts about Nxe4?! :wink: But them what else could he do, he already looked in a bad way at the time of the sac anyway.
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9773
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb »

AdminX wrote:
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:With all due respect to the super Grandmasters,the two sacrifices are totaly,and I mean totaly unsound....I wish the chess engines that I play make such sacrifices....unfortunately they don't....
Dr.D
With all due respect to you Dr D, I think the Shirov Sac might be okay. I don't know about the other one (Nisipeanu) however, I have strong doubts about Nxe4?! :wink:
My opinion is that Shirov's one is the worst move os the two you posted here....a full speculation....I mean look at the position....Shirov most probably was seeking a psychological effect on his opponent rather than making an effective move....
Dr.D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
User avatar
AdminX
Posts: 6363
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: Acworth, GA

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by AdminX »

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
AdminX wrote:
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:With all due respect to the super Grandmasters,the two sacrifices are totaly,and I mean totaly unsound....I wish the chess engines that I play make such sacrifices....unfortunately they don't....
Dr.D
With all due respect to you Dr D, I think the Shirov Sac might be okay. I don't know about the other one (Nisipeanu) however, I have strong doubts about Nxe4?! :wink:
My opinion is that Shirov's one is the worst move os the two you posted here....a full speculation....
Dr.D


:D :D I think he has good compensation for the sac, I don't think he was ready for the counter sac (14. ... Rxd4). From a psychological point of view I think Ivanchuk won the upper hand after this.
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
kgburcham
Posts: 2016
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:19 pm

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by kgburcham »

4x2.93 i7 940
6 gigs Ram
Vista Ultimate 64 (lean)
Rybka 3
Deep Fritz 11
Zappa Mexico II

Ted thanks for the post, two interesting games to compare to programs.
I have been working on your post all morning.

Here is some of what I have found:

Shirov,A - Ivanchuk,V, Kings' Tournament 2009

[d] r3kb1r/1pq1pppp/p1p5/2pnP3/4N1b1/5N2/PPPP1PPP/R1BQ1RK1 w kq - 0 1

Deep Fritz 11 best line
9.c4 Nb4 10.d4 0-0-0 11.Nxc5 e6 12.Nxb7
+/= (0.27) Depth: 23/44 00:05:13 3049mN

GM moves
9. c4 Nb4 10. d4 O-O-O 11. Nxc5 e6 12. Nxb7


[d] 2kr1b1r/1Nq2ppp/p1p1p3/4P3/1nPP2b1/5N2/PP3PPP/R1BQ1RK1 b - - 0 1

Deep Fritz 11 best line
12...Qxb7 13.a3 Bxf3 14.gxf3 Rxd4 15.Qxd4 Nc2 16.Qd3 Nxa1 17.b4 Be7
= (0.14) Depth: 27/46 00:06:16 4116mN

GM moves
12...Qxb7 13. a3 Bxf3 14. gxf3 Rxd4 15. Qxd4 Nc2 16. Qd3 Nxa1 17. b4 Be7

Rybka 3 says 12.Nxb7 is best move up to depth 21 ( I shut off at 15 minutes) Note you stopped yours at 5 minutes--but Rybka would have picked yours back up with same move in your eval.

12.Nxb7 Bxf3 13.gxf3[] Qxb7 14.a3
= (0.09) Depth: 19 00:05:53 97885kN
12.Nxb7 Bxf3 13.gxf3[] Qxb7 14.a3
= (0.09) Depth: 20 00:07:31 127mN
12.Nxb7
+/= (0.29 !) Depth: 21 00:15:36 262mN


Note here Rybka 3 says 9.c4 is best move up to depth 15. Note .18 at depth 22 by Rybka 3 after playing 9.c4.
So it seems Rybka thinks 12.Nxb7 & 9.c4 are sound moves.

This is before 9.c4
[d] r3kb1r/1pq1pppp/p1p5/2pnP3/4N1b1/5N2/PPPP1PPP/R1BQ1RK1 w kq - 0 1

Rybka 3:

9.c4 Nb6 10.d3
+/= (0.39) Depth: 6 00:00:00 16kN
9.c4 Nb6 10.d3 Nd7 11.Bf4
+/= (0.40) Depth: 7 00:00:00 22kN
9.c4 Nb4 10.d4 Bxf3 11.gxf3 0-0-0
+/= (0.36) Depth: 8 00:00:00 41kN
9.c4 Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 cxd5 12.cxd5 0-0-0
+/= (0.36) Depth: 9 00:00:00 72kN
9.c4 Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 cxd5 12.cxd5 0-0-0 13.h3 Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Nd4
= (0.25) Depth: 10 00:00:00 103kN
9.c4 Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nd4 15.Qxf7 Qxe5 16.Nxc5 Qxd5 17.Qxd5 Rxd5 18.Na4
+/= (0.37) Depth: 11 00:00:00 209kN
9.c4 Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nd4 15.Qxf7 Qxe5 16.Nxc5 Qxd5 17.Qxd5 Rxd5 18.Na4
+/= (0.37) Depth: 12 00:00:01 274kN
9.c4 Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nd4 15.Qxf7 Qxe5 16.Nxc5 Qxd5 17.Qxd5 Rxd5 18.Na4
+/= (0.37) Depth: 13 00:00:01 404kN
9.c4 Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nd4 15.Qxf7 Qxe5 16.Nxc5 Qxd5 17.Qxd5 Rxd5 18.Na4
+/= (0.37) Depth: 14 00:00:02 708kN
9.d3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3[]
= (0.24) Depth: 15 00:00:13 3438kN
9.d3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3[] Qxe5 11.Re1 e6 12.Bg5 Qc7 13.c4 Be7 14.d4 0-0 15.Bxe7 Nxe7 16.dxc5 Nf5 17.Rad1 Rfd8 18.Qb3 h6
= (0.16) Depth: 16 00:00:27 7887kN
9.d3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3[] Qxe5 11.Re1 e6 12.Bg5 Qc7 13.c4 Be7 14.d4 0-0 15.cxd5 cxd5 16.Qg3 Qxg3 17.hxg3 f6 18.Nxc5 Bxc5 19.dxc5 fxg5 20.Rxe6 Rae8 21.Rxe8 Rxe8 22.Rd1 Re5 23.b4 Kf7 24.f3
+/= (0.28) Depth: 17 00:00:55 15874kN
9.d3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3[] Qxe5 11.Re1 e6 12.Bg5 Qc7 13.c4 Be7 14.d4 0-0 15.cxd5 cxd5 16.Qg3 Qxg3 17.hxg3 f6 18.Nxc5 Bxc5 19.dxc5 fxg5 20.Rxe6 Rae8 21.Rxe8 Rxe8 22.Rd1 Re5 23.b4 Kf7 24.f3
+/= (0.28) Depth: 18 00:01:17 22088kN
9.d3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3[] Qxe5 11.Bd2 e6 12.c4 Nb4 13.Bc3
+/= (0.35) Depth: 19 00:05:39 103mN
9.d3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3[] Qxe5 11.Bd2 Qc7 12.c4 Nf6 13.Rad1 Nxe4 14.dxe4 e5 15.Qf5 Bd6 16.Qg4 g6 17.Bh6 Qe7 18.Rd3 Rd8 19.Rfd1 f6 20.R1d2
+/= (0.35) Depth: 20 00:11:09 205mN



After 9.c4

[d] r3kb1r/1pq1pppp/p1p5/2pnP3/2P1N1b1/5N2/PP1P1PPP/R1BQ1RK1 b kq c3 0 1

Rybka 3:

9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 0-0-0 12.Be3 cxd5 13.cxd5 f5 14.Nc3
= (0.24) Depth: 10 00:00:01 227kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nd4 15.Qxf7 Qxe5
= (0.25) Depth: 11 00:00:01 278kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nd4 15.Qxf7 Qxe5 16.Nxc5 Qxd5 17.Qxd5 Rxd5 18.Na4 Rd8
+/= (0.29) Depth: 12 00:00:01 354kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 0-0-0 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 cxd5 14.cxd5 Nd4 15.Qxf7 Qxe5 16.Nxc5 Qxd5 17.Qxd5 Rxd5 18.Na4 Rd8
+/= (0.29) Depth: 13 00:00:01 478kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 Nd4 13.Qh5 cxd5 14.cxd5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Bg7 18.Be3 Bxe5 19.Rfd1 Rxc7 20.Bxd4 Bxd4
= (0.14) Depth: 14 00:00:04 1221kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3[] Nd4 13.Qh5 cxd5 14.cxd5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Bg7 18.Be3 Bxe5 19.Rfd1 Rxc7 20.Bxd4 Bxd4
= (0.14) Depth: 15 00:00:08 2100kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 Nd4 13.Qh5 cxd5 14.cxd5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Bg7 18.Be3 Bxe5 19.Rfd1 Rxc7 20.Bxd4 Bxd4
= (0.14) Depth: 16 00:00:12 3459kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 Nd4 13.Qh5 cxd5 14.cxd5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Bg7 18.f4 Rxc7 19.b4
= (0.20) Depth: 17 00:00:20 5498kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 cxd5 13.cxd5 Nd4 14.Qh5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Nc2 18.Rb1 Rxc7 19.b4 a5 20.a3 axb4 21.axb4 Bg7 22.f4 b6 23.Na4 b5 24.Nc5 0-0
= (0.21) Depth: 18 00:00:40 11130kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 cxd5 13.cxd5 Nd4 14.Qh5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Nc2 18.Rb1 Rxc7 19.b4 a5 20.a3 axb4 21.axb4 Bg7 22.f4 b6 23.Na4 b5 24.Nc5 0-0
= (0.23) Depth: 19 00:01:14 20279kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3[] cxd5 13.cxd5 Nd4 14.Qh5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Nc2 18.Rb1 Rxc7 19.b4 a5 20.a3 axb4 21.axb4 Bg7 22.f4 b6 23.Na4 b5 24.Nc5 0-0
= (0.23) Depth: 20 00:02:34 40746kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 cxd5 13.cxd5 Nd4 14.Qh5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Nc2 18.Rb1 Rxc7 19.b4 a5 20.a3 axb4 21.axb4 Bg7 22.f4 b6 23.Na4 b5 24.Nc5 0-0
= (0.23) Depth: 21 00:03:51 61695kN
9...Nf4 10.d4 Ne6 11.d5 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 cxd5 13.cxd5 Nd4[] 14.Qh5 g6 15.d6 gxh5 16.dxc7 Rc8 17.Nxc5 Nc2 18.Rb1[] Rxc7 19.b4 a5 20.a3 Rg8 21.e6 axb4 22.axb4 Rg4 23.Bd2 b6
= (0.18) Depth: 22 00:09:24 161mN

Ted I am not finished---I will look at the rest of the game---you probably already have.

kgburcham
ernest
Posts: 2053
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:30 pm

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by ernest »

kgburcham wrote:4x2.93 i7 940
6 gigs Ram
Vista Ultimate 64 (lean)
Rybka 3
Deep Fritz 11
Zappa Mexico II
kgburcham
Nice! Can you overclock it? Can you disable HyperThreading (good for Rybka: +20%)
tano-urayoan
Posts: 638
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:23 pm
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by tano-urayoan »

Quoting Uri Blass: " I disagree" The Shirov "sacrifice" seems ok he just missed an intermediate check in g7, but if Rogozenko analysis is correct he will achieve a pawn advantage but black should be ok.

About Nisipeneau's Gelfand praise the move as excellent, but he stumble in time pressure.

Both are good moves considering the cirmunstances.
kgburcham
Posts: 2016
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:19 pm

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by kgburcham »

New Dell.
Before I fired it up for the first time---I removed the hard drive.
Installed a spare HD, format, loaded Vista 64 (Modified) Ultimate.
My XP Pro would not see over 4 gigs Ram. Vista sees the full 6 gig ram.

After firing it up, checked Task Manager and it showed 8 threads so I disabled hyperthreading in bios. Not interested in doing any testing to prove 4 vers 8 threads.

I keep waiting for something negative to happen with Vista, so far I really like this Operating system, fast, fast boot up, same features I liked in XP are still in Vista. I will keep using Vista for now, I can always load my XP if I choose. I have tried W7 beta--seems ok, when the final release comes out I will buy.
Maybe later I will build another dual socket, they are fun. What I have now is enough expense. Maybe I will buy a motherboard and just oc the i7, but I do not want high DB. Low DB on my new pc, even when hot.

Maybe I will just sell all my chess programs and take up something more exciting like bird watching.

kgburcham
User avatar
AdminX
Posts: 6363
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: Acworth, GA

Re: Two Knight Sacs, but no bacon ...

Post by AdminX »

tano-urayoan wrote:Quoting Uri Blass: " I disagree" The Shirov "sacrifice" seems ok he just missed an intermediate check in g7, but if Rogozenko analysis is correct he will achieve a pawn advantage but black should be ok.

About Nisipeneau's Gelfand praise the move as excellent, but he stumble in time pressure.

Both are good moves considering the cirmunstances.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers