Why is this position evaluated so?

Technical questions regarding Openings, Middlegames, Endings etc.
soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 1571
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby soheil_hooshdaran » Sat Jul 23, 2016 8:59 pm

What trade?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 15391
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby Roger de Coverly » Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:05 pm

soheil_hooshdaran wrote:What trade?


You have played .. Bg7, your opponent plays Bh6, or the other way round. You either then play Bxh6 yourself, or allow them to play Bxg7.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 1571
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby soheil_hooshdaran » Sun Jul 31, 2016 6:46 am

Why is Black's position evaluated as winning in:
[FEN "8/pp3pkp/8/8/n1Pp3P/5PK1/P5P1/5B2 w - - 0 34"] [SetUp "1"] * with White to move, even though pawns are at both sides and the center is not closed?

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby MartinCarpenter » Sun Jul 31, 2016 8:49 am

Not really sure to be honest. The knight is good and the d pawn obviously rather dangerous but winning?

Seems rather strong really. You'd expect quite a bit of analysis backing it up in a book.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 15391
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby Roger de Coverly » Sun Jul 31, 2016 8:52 am

MartinCarpenter wrote:Not really sure to be honest. The knight is good and the d pawn obviously rather dangerous but winning?


I'd suspect there's a line where Black wins the a pawn by force. But as suggested, concrete lines needed.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 1571
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby soheil_hooshdaran » Sun Jul 31, 2016 9:00 am

MartinCarpenter wrote:Not really sure to be honest. The knight is good and the d pawn obviously rather dangerous but winning?

Seems rather strong really. You'd expect quite a bit of analysis backing it up in a book.

I found this position in a game analysis in Megaa database . Chessbase gave this position a "-+"!

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby MartinCarpenter » Sun Jul 31, 2016 9:40 am

Ah. I get the impression that you often don't need the same sort of evidence for doing that as you'd ask of a book :)

If it is -+ then it definitely isn't trival - sillicon not universally great in endings but Stockfish's immediate evaluation is that white is up half a pawn after Kf4. The tactics to do with Nc5/d4,d3,d2 etc seem to work out fine for white and it isn't obvious what else black can do.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 1571
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby soheil_hooshdaran » Tue Mar 14, 2017 5:59 am

What're the tactical complications in
[FEN "2r2q1k/p1rb4/1pNp1b2/PP1Pp1pp/4PnP1/7P/5B2/1R1QRBK1 w - - 0 35"] [SetUp "1"] *
(after Black's ...h5)?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 15391
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby Roger de Coverly » Tue Mar 14, 2017 9:01 am

soheil_hooshdaran wrote:What're the tactical complications in


That White might get mated, I would have thought. After .. h5, there's the threat of an exchange of pawns on g4, followed up with ideas of moving the Bishop from d7 and following up with .. Rh7 and .. Qh6 with a heavy piece line up on the h file. There again Black may be busted on the Queen side. It's a position where there are a number of tactical ideas and how they interplay determines the evaluation. Hence the annotator's "tactical complications" comment.

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Postby MartinCarpenter » Tue Mar 14, 2017 10:14 am

Or sacs to promote whites Q side or..... Basically everywhere.


Return to “Chess Questions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests