The chess.com computer might not be seeing the whole line. One possibility is this draw by repetition:
10. ... dxe4 11. cxb4 exf3 12. bxc5 Qd4 attacking the a1 rook. White can try to trap the queen on a1 with 13. Qd2 intending to meet Qxa1 with Bb2, but then black has 13. ... Qg4 14. Qg5 Qd4 15. Qd2 etc.
I don't think black has better than this. If black goes with 12. ... fxg2 white can just move the rook 13. Re1 and take the pawn on g2 when it's safe.
hey, even i could not figure it out. So, had to ask fritz and he came up with a nice tactic dxe4 cxb4 exf3 bxc5 Qd4 winning the piece back for black along the a1-d4 diagonal.
hsbgowd, see my post right before yours. That line only forces a draw.
Nice analysis of that line, Loomis. Thanks! So, if I understood you correctly, the best that black can get after playing 10. ... dxe4 11. cxb4 exf3 12. bxc5 is a draw. Is that because he is now a Bishop down?
Maybe this could be another possibility 10. ... dxe4 11. cxb4 Bxf2+ 12. Rxf2 exf3 reaching this possition? Maybe that could that be a little bit better for white?
Black is still a bishop down in that line and now Qd4 is met by Bb2, so now the draw is even out of the question.
like uh yea i suppose so if it really meant for that to like happen that way u know........
Computer accuracy depends on time or depth. The longer the time, the deeper the calculation and the more accurate it gets. Usually there's a certain depth where computer calculation can be considered accurate enough.
Some complex (usually tactical) positions just have so many possibilities that it will take more time than usual for the computer to get to a reliable depth, hence reliable result.
I have heard that you "cannot" (to certain extent of course) rely on computer to analyze Ruy Lopez positions because often White gets a minus sign from the computer when from best practice we know that the position will eventually gets to White's favor. I think KID short-term analysis also tends to give too big plus for White.
BTW, I think I prefer 10...Bg4 pinning the knight to the queen. This allows trapping the rook with ...Bd4 if White ever takes the knight on b4. It also threatens ...dxe4 which will give a positionally good position for Black imo. The pin works because White cannot chase the bishop with h3 and g4 because that will sacrifice his king's safety.
If only White doesn't have the bishop pair, I think I will prefer 10...dxc4 as "suggested" by the computer. Here Black has 2 pawns for a piece but White risks an inferior ending due to the bad pawn formation, and the exposed king to take care so White cannot plan an attack but surrender to Black's plan to exchange and transform to suitable endgame. But because White has bishop pair, I think I will go for a draw after 10...dxc4, as stated by Loomis.
Your last suggestion is worse than previous line where Black takes g2-pawn instead of f2-pawn. Material balance is identical but in the later White has better pawn structure (g and h pawns are connected)
Thanks for the input, guys! So, should I just conclude that computer analysis went wrong?
Hi folks! Here is another move suggested by the computer which I don't understand. This happened in a recent game in which I was playing white under the Italian Game Opening. Here are all the moves until the one in question:
The suggested move I don't understand is 14.Nxb5 instead of 14.Bd3 and the suggested continuation for black which is 14... Nc2 instead of 14... cxb5 winning the Knight. Why wouldn't black take it? Are there some tactics involved that I'm missing?
PS: As a side question, in a previous line, the computer suggests 9.0-0-0 instead of 9.0-0. Is that because of the move h6?
After 14.Bd3, ignore the trapped knight at a1 and calculate the material balance: White is DOWN one rook versus a bishop. That is losing. But quite a fortune White has a just in time (almost late by one tempo) winning attack due to Black's exposed king: 14.Nxb5 cxb5? 15.e5!! Only by sacrificing 1 point (1 knight for 2 pawns) White has a dangerous e-pawn attack because it also threatens discovered attack and potential fork at g7.
But imo 14...Nc2 is not the best defense because it is clear that Black's king is in serious danger if he doesn't have the required time to castle kingside (note the so many possible lines of attack). So 14...Be7 is mandatory or best to save himself.
9.0-0-0 or 9.0-0 is almost equal imo. It means there is no obvious reason why one should be better than the other (computer doesn't think strategically, she just compares positions and values which one is better). But as a human, h6 do makes big difference. h6 makes Black's kingside weak and can be attack more quicky if there will be an opposite-side attack. If instead Black castles queenside, White's army is still in better position for queenside attack imo.
this is about the first move. 'Pologies if it's redundant or wrong...
Thanks for your answer, yusuf. So 14... cxb5 is bad because of the possibilities of attack by the e5 pawn. In that case, assuming white goes greedy and goes 12... cxb5 16... bxc4, would the response be more or less like this (line in red below)?
I may have done something wrong because after that line I'm way down in material, even though white's king is badly exposed.
JG27Pyth, that move was studied above and it loses to 13.Qd2 Qxa1 14.Bb2 trapping the Queen.
JG27Pyth, that move was studied above and it loses to 13.Qd2 Qxa1 14.Bb2 trapping the Queen.
Yes, of course... or 13.Bd2 Qxa1 14.Bc3 works as well. -- So I was wrong and redundant... and I was late getting the kids to school. Alas!
Computer analysis also relies on values that are "agreed on" by mountains of game data, but in-practice are merely based on an ideal. Like, for example, even though the computer "likes a line" because it leaves you with a bishop pair, that advantage may not always lead to a win, despite giving you a higher score. I've had numerous games where I was seriously behind on material (and there's no doubt that anaylsis would have backed that up) yet was able to win because my opponent missed a mate threat.
I guess the biggest advantage that the Analysis Tool had, when I first started submitting games, was to show that my opponents made just as many "mistakes" as I did, and this helped me tremendously when I was first learning the game. Later on, there are sound principles that guide you when you make your move choices, and you'll fall back on those principles rather than assume that a line is better just because the computer gave it a better score.
Sinerged: I may have done something wrong because after that line I'm way down in material, even though white's king is badly exposed.
That line you gave is almost certainly not the best but it's a very tricky position tactically. It's the kind of position that computers excell at and humans have trouble with so don't feel bad about not getting the best line... I'm not saying I can prove otherwise. All I'm saying is that it's a head scratcher.
After 14.Nxb5 cxb5 we run into lots variations both attacking and defending to analyze. 15.Bxb5+ is the first to look at, with e5 coming sooner rather than later. Maybe someone can find a clearly winning line here... but it's beyond my limited tactical reach... I think the thing to see is that giving up a piece for two pawns (in the 15.Bxb5+ line) White is trading a pawn's worth of material for an attack (one the computer thinks is sound), pinning a piece (after Nd7 to block check) and keeping Black's king trapped in the center.
Strategically this seems quite right -- If White is to have any chance of saving this game he must find some way to grab the initiative and attack... he's already down at least the exchange, so he does NOT want this game to go to an end game. White wants middlegame complications and tactical chances and an attack. He gets all that from Nxb5. It's worth the risk. That's a my (low-level human) evaluation.
A high level human evaluation, or the computer evaluation, actually calculates out the various lines a good bit further looking at the make-or-break tactical details of the position. In the computer's view, apparently, the attack is sound. Unless I'm mistaken we'd really need to look at quite a few variations to prove that. I don't see anything strictly forcing in the immediate vicinity...but of course there IS something, computer's don't speculate (much). As always... I'm ready to be proven wrong.
In post#13, 17.fxe7?? is a mistake. That way Black's king is not exposed and exchanging the queen is the same as resigning. The key to White's advantage is the power of the pawn. It's pressure in term of pin and promotion threat should be maintained and the a1-knight should be quickly taken before Black can breath. So in post#15 the correct move is 17.Rxa1! This way, White doesn't have to deal with recapturing the knight later, and still has the tempo and resources to maintain the pressure with Re1.
17.Rxa1 gxf6 18.Bxf6 (Now White has another threat: discovered check with the help of extra pin with Re1 or Black should give away the rook) Kf8 (giving away the rook) 19.Bxh8 (Now the material is even but White has a winning endgame because Black's pawn formation is scattered and weak)
First, always assume that you are wrong and the computer is right. While this will not always be the case, this will greatly help you, because most of the time you're just missing something tactical, and the comp sees way deeper than you do.
Black's in a ton of trouble in your line, but I'm not sure it's best. Rxa1 is inferior to Re1 due to how important every tempo is. gxf6 lets white win the bishop with a huge attack due to the pin, so black can't play it. My comp says that Rc8 is best, the rook can defend the bishop if white plays fxg7.
Anyway, you're going have to look through it. I think white's f-pawn is a constant threat to promote, and white's also bearing down on blacks king (and black has to give up his bishop for a half-decent game, so even though white's down a ton of material, he gets better compensation this way. I mean, it's really hard to see otb, but it's probably best.
Hello folks! First post ever!
I recently had one of my games analyzed by the Chess.com computer system. In this game I was playing black and at my 10th move I got to the position shown below:
Computer analysis recommends the move 10... dxe4. But I don't understand what's the benefit of that move since even though I'm threatening 11... exf3, after 11.cxb4, White is threatening 12.bxc5 winning the exchange. The line recommended by the computer analysis is shown in the diagram. And to my surprise, the analysis recommends dxe4 instead of cxb4. Why??
It seems to me that the point of dxe4 is that if white goes greedily after black's material white might get opportunities for a devastating attack on g7. But I'm not sure if that is correct and that is where I would like your input. Any thoughts??
Thanks!!