Pro Deo Tal Engine - Sac-a-licious!

I just ran across this Nezhmetdinov game where he sacrifices his queen for two minor pieces. (12.QxBf6) Apparently, it's one of those intuitive sacs where all the variations can't be figured out over the board. Nezh even claimed that he wasn't able to calculate everything out in post-game analysis. But Nezh plays it anyway and wins the game. (The strategic basis for the sacrifice is Black's backward development and the weakness of the black squares around his king.)

So I plugged the position into a few engines, including Pro Deo 1.6 Tal, to see what would happen. Of course, Rybka and Stockfish prefer the mundane 12.Qh6, but Pro Deo Tal plays the sac! (I should point out that Pro Deo Tal isn't very strong, maybe 2000 or so. One might be able to tweak the personality settings and get the strength up to around 2500, but even then it's not going to tear up other engines. But I think it would give any normal person a good game. Also note that the evaluations for the Tal setting are way optimistic, so this can't be used for analysis - Only for fun! )


Rybka 2.3.2 best move: 12.Qh6 - eval +0.11
sac eval: -0.86

Stockfish 1.7.1 best move: 12.Qh6 - eval +0.28
sac eval: -1.53

Pro Deo 1.6 (normal) best move: 12.Qh6 - eval +0.33
sac eval: -0.76

Pro Deo 1.6 (Tal) best move: 12.QxBf6! - eval +1.13

Did you plug Qxf6 into the other engines to see how much the evaluation changed?

Sometimes you can go down the line a bit and make it change dramatically.

By the way, that was a nice post.

Thanks for showing me the Nezh game. I had Super Nezh off my bookshelf two days ago and played through a few of his games !!!

Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromfics
Did you plug Qxf6 into the other engines to see how much the evaluation changed?

Yeah, the numbers are up there. (sac eval entries for the first three engine results)

For example, for Rybka, the swing in eval for the sac went from +0.11 to -0.86 (almost one pawn).

Just for fun, see how long it takes them to find the mate in this famous position.



White walks his king up the dark squares to e7, plays Ne8 or Ne4, and mates with Nf6.

Most Instructive Games, from a Vienna. Played in 1953,
Chernev note about obession with checkmate?
See Saw checks and other tactics.?
Olafsson, Anderssen (something like that).
"Now white is back on the right track..."

I'm enjoying this.

That's from memory - the book is about ten feet away...

(I cannot remember the two white pawns being there.)

How'd I do?

Have not seen that game in any other book.

Super Nezh by Alex Pishkin tells the story.

This is the note after black's eleventh move:

"Long ago this position was known to be drawn because White could choose between 12.Qh6 Bg7 13.Qh4 Bf6 with a repetition of moves, or 13.Qg5 Qxg5 14.Bxg5 Nxb3 15.axb3 Bxc3 with a drawn endgame. If 12.Qg3 or 12.Qf4, black would reply 12. ...Qxc3! .

Chernikov was sure that his opponent wanted to rest that day. Therefore he quietly strolled about in the tournament hall. Meanwhile time went on and Nezh continued to think. Everyone was puzzled "what was Rashid Gibyatovich thinking about," there was no avoiding a draw... At last a boy, out of breathe, ran up to Chernikov and said: "Dyadya, a Queen was sacrificed to you!"

The game goes on to mention various improvements for black including 14. ... d5! and say that Nezh did not fear playing into these positions again. Black would have a lot to contend with in a live game.

It's not necessarily sound. It's just one player's unwillingness to agree to a dull draw so early, even at the risk of losing! Being over the board inspiration makes it ten times more admirable as well!

Here is one final quote from the book:

"The game produced such an impression on the many participants of the championship team that none of them presented their games to the judges for the beauty prize - it was guaranteed in advance to Nezh."

I just had that book out, and I can't remember white.
Kupt something ... VS Andreassen

Nice memory !

A very inspiring game. That one made a deep impression me.
If only some of the other masterpieces in that book had made
the same impression I might have been a good player. 🙁

Sorry for the hijack - please continue.

Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromfics
Just for fun, see how long it takes them to find the mate in this famous position.

[fen]b5kr/7p/3N2pB/4p3/8/8/PP3P1P/4K3[/fen]

White walks his king up the dark squares to e7, plays Ne8 or Ne4, and mates with Nf6.

Short had a game against Timman with a king walk as the theme, but I don't remember where or when. I think Timman resigned once he realized Short's king was on the march.

I posted that game once, and so did someone else.
It's a nice one.
Let me see if I can find the thread.

Here it is:

Thread 100650

You can clearly see why a thread should have a distinctive title.
It only took me seconds to find this!

Originally posted by greenpawn34
A very inspiring game. That one made a deep impression me.
If only some of the other masterpieces in that book had made
the same impression I might have been a good player. 🙁

Sorry for the hijack - please continue.

I don't mind the hijack at all. I looked the game up. (One of these days I'll go through that book! ) Game 19, page 85, "The See-Saw Check, Zugzwang, and Other Tactical Tricks", A. Kupferstich - J. Andreassen, Denmark 1953. I also noticed that it's Black to move at that position.

Originally posted by Mad Rook
I don't mind the hijack at all. I looked the game up. (One of these days I'll go through that book! ) Game 19, page 85, "The See-Saw Check, Zugzwang, and Other Tactical Tricks", A. Kupferstich - J. Andreassen, Denmark 1953. I also noticed that it's Black to move at that position.

That's it.
Black resigned right there!

That is a great read.
As greenpawn stated, that is the one game that will stick with you the most.
Schlechter and Petrosian's bashings of the Stonewall Dutch are also memorable for me.
The Capa rook ending in the front is also among the finest.

I have read that book cover to cover at least twice.
It's enjoyable and instructive.

That's it. Kupferstich (who he?) could never remember his name.

You must do the book. It's wonderful.

I find it amazing but I cannot think of any other book written with such
clarity and instructive explanations.

Some come close but this is still tops them.

(still say Alekhine v Yates 1923 should have gone in there.
If I had seen that then with Chernev's notes I would have drooled
over that game for years as well.)