Kasparov-Deep Thought 1997 (second game)

[Rodolfo Leoni]

In his recent book, Deep Thinking, Kasparov states that after 45. Ta6 ? the game was really lost, not draw as it was at that time thought.

This book was published recently, therefore Kasparov might have used Stockfish to analyze.
Rr6/5kp1/1qQb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P4P/6P1/5K2 w - - 0 46

My stockfish copy already computes for more than a few seconds and still cannot find the draw , showing 46.Ra6 Qe3 47.Dxd6 Re8 48.Qd7+ (not 48.Bf3? Qc1+ draw or 48.h4? Qxe4 draw ) Re7 49.Qc6

Whats' wrong with Qxb6?

The debate is about : is it draw after Ra6 or not ?

And the answer is... analysis lead to draw...

[Rebel]

In his recent book, Deep Thinking, Kasparov states that after 45. Ta6 ? the game was really lost, not draw as it was at that time thought.

John Nunn

http://en.chessbase.com/post/komodo-8-d ... d-part-one
says that was draw.

Who is right ?

Chessbase.

45..Qe3 draws. 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 with perpetual check.

The right move was 45. Qd7+ not Ra6.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

In his recent book, Deep Thinking, Kasparov states that after 45. Ta6 ? the game was really lost, not draw as it was at that time thought.

This book was published recently, therefore Kasparov might have used Stockfish to analyze.
Rr6/5kp1/1qQb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P4P/6P1/5K2 w - - 0 46

My stockfish copy already computes for more than a few seconds and still cannot find the draw , showing 46.Ra6 Qe3 47.Dxd6 Re8 48.Qd7+ (not 48.Bf3? Qc1+ draw or 48.h4? Qxe4 draw ) Re7 49.Qc6

Whats' wrong with Qxb6?

The debate is about : is it draw after Ra6 or not ?

maybe Qd4 instead of Qc4 capture is the better try:

[d]8/3r2p1/2RPqpkp/8/1PpQp3/2P4P/6P1/6K1 b - - 0 10

and then, e3 Qg4! Qg4 hg4(the h pawn becomes a g pawn, no matter that doubled and that might be decisive in winning some tbs rook endgames) f5 Kf1 fg4 Ke2:

[d]8/3r2p1/2RP2kp/8/1Pp3p1/2P1p3/4K1P1/8 b - - 0 14

this seems to be won for white, but I can not vouch for it 100%, there are simply too many tbs draws in similar single rook endgames.

for example, one rook endgame with c4 white passer and a pair of h pawns on the king side might be drawn, while another one, with same c4 white passer and a pair of g pawns on the king side already won.

very subtle differences, so I really can't be sure.

what our distinguished contributors say?

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

yeah, that is already certainly won.

no line that I did not check.

so, Qg4+ was the right move, but who is going to double his pawns?

most engines/humans will exclude such a move by default, that is why the Nunn team did not find it.

maybe someone will still refute me?

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

you can not call a position with a pawn more, more active rook and more active king a clear draw.

rather, if draw, it is a very chance draw, one in 10 or so.

pure chance.

when 9/10 of all lines are evaluated with 200+cps, and only 1/10, a very small path, would be more or less close to 0, you can not speak of a clear draw.

of course, Kasparov knows much better than Nunn.

my personal relationships don't concern you in any way at all, and I don't care about yours.

you seem to miss the whole lot of positive feedback, but that is your own problem.

it is always difficult to communicate with Rybka fans...

Then, I assume:

1. You don't know how to play chess;
2. I'm not talking with an aware soul, but only with a "I know everything" mechanism;
3. To continue with this "game" (not real chess) is to waste time;
4. Rybka fan? You didn't get any sense of my opinion. V.R. cloned parts of Fruit and Crafty, and it's an heavy issue.

You can autoplay the position. Maybe, you could open your own topic about it. Be sure, nobody will distract you.

1. I never read the full FIDE rules of chess, indeed.
2. you seem to have problems with open discussion
3. your present standpoint on VR dramatically clashes with your past opinion, expressed many times on this forum. maybe you change too quickly priorities and viewpoints, I don't know.
4. no one wants you to play any games at all. we are just discussing how this not so uninteresting position after all, will play out.

All right. I had to study FIDE rules because I played some tournaments. Last one, 17 years ago, I won with 6/7 and second was Master Isacco Ibba with 5/7. At least, I know some chess.

I'll be happy to see you having "open discussions" with someone else, then...

"dramatically clashes"...!!!

Please re-read my post about it. VR made great search breakthroughts. A pity he ruined his work at start because of cloning parts of Fruit and Crafty. That was the concept. If you can only duplicate half of it in your mind, it's your problem, not mine.

I invite you again to start a new thread with your analysis. It'll be like the one you opened with Aronian-Carlsen game. A thread only for you...

I am also a Bulgarian candidate master from 1998, but then, due to professional business, I played just very few games.

in the last couple of years I have played and analysed so much, that I doubt there is any second player on the planet who has done like me.

you might understand why I am so ambitious.

please see my Qg4 suggestion in the next post, maybe you will succeed in refuting it too, or simply acknowledge my chess assessment is way above yours?

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

In his recent book, Deep Thinking, Kasparov states that after 45. Ta6 ? the game was really lost, not draw as it was at that time thought.

This book was published recently, therefore Kasparov might have used Stockfish to analyze.
Rr6/5kp1/1qQb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P4P/6P1/5K2 w - - 0 46

My stockfish copy already computes for more than a few seconds and still cannot find the draw , showing 46.Ra6 Qe3 47.Dxd6 Re8 48.Qd7+ (not 48.Bf3? Qc1+ draw or 48.h4? Qxe4 draw ) Re7 49.Qc6

Whats' wrong with Qxb6?

The debate is about : is it draw after Ra6 or not ?

And the answer is... analysis lead to draw...

what about this one?

[d]8/3r2p1/2RP2kp/8/1Pp3p1/2P1p3/4K1P1/8 b - - 0 14

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

ok, main line is h5 Ke3 Kf6 b5 Ke6 Rc4 Rd6 Rc5 Rd5 Rc6 Rd6 Ra6, and white wins that:

[d]8/6p1/R2rk3/1P5p/6p1/2P1K3/6P1/8 b - - 0 20

any suggestions for improvements for black?

[Ignacio]

What about Kf7 (not Qxg4)after Qg4+?

Ignacio.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

What about Kf7 (not Qxg4)after Qg4+?

Ignacio.

won in all lines.

Rc7 Qg4 hg4 Ke6 Rd7 Kd7 Kf1:

[d]8/3k2p1/3P1p1p/8/1Pp3P1/2P1p3/6P1/5K2 b - - 0 15

or, Rc7 dc7 f5 Qe2 Ke7 c8q Qc8 Qe3 Qe6 Qc5 Ke8 b5:

[d]4k3/6p1/4q2p/1PQ2p2/2p5/2P4P/6P1/6K1 b - - 0 18

and this queen ending is won too

[Ignacio]

What about Kf7 (not Qxg4)after Qg4+?

Ignacio.

won in all lines.

Rc7 Qg4 hg4 Ke6 Rd7 Kd7 Kf1:

[d]8/3k2p1/3P1p1p/8/1Pp3P1/2P1p3/6P1/5K2 b - - 0 15

or, Rc7 dc7 f5 Qe2 Ke7 c8q Qc8 Qe3 Qe6 Qc5 Ke8 b5:

[d]4k3/6p1/4q2p/1PQ2p2/2p5/2P4P/6P1/6K1 b - - 0 18

and this queen ending is won too

The first position is easy draw