Answers.Body: <p>Computer evaluation is based on perfect play from both sides, which is never the case in human games, and hence is irrelevant here. Given the nature of the position and the time situation, it is crystal clear that Firouzja had the &quot;psychological&quot; advantage, which he could've converted had the game been continued smoothly. Playing with a rook and an unsafe king against the bishop pair under time pressure is a nightmare for every chess player. Maneuvering with the two bishops is much easier. All this, in addition to other factors such as Firouzja's tournament position, makes up the post-game controversy that has arisen.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-19T17:59:03.100Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-02-19T17:59:03.100Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Wais Kamal
Answers.Body: <p><a href="https://chess24.com/en/read/news/tata-steel-chess-apologise-to-firouzja-after-controversy#:%7E:text=An%20incident%20involving%2017%2Dyear,on%20chess24%20and%20social%20media" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://chess24.com/en/read/news/tata-steel-chess-apologise-to-firouzja-after-controversy#:~:text=An%20incident%20involving%2017%2Dyear,on%20chess24%20and%20social%20media</a>.</p>
  <p>this is the answer to your question</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-19T17:19:07.223Z
Answers.Text: This appears to be a link-only answer which may become useless if the link rots.  Instead, it would be more useful to future visitors if you summarize the relevant content here and provide the link.
Answers.UserDisplayName: SecretAgentMan
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-19T16:37:10.230Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-02-19T16:37:10.230Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Thomas Croon
Body: <p>The tournment director apologied to Firoujza for moving his game on move 60. However, according to Stockfish 12 NNUE d=61the position on the board just before the players moved is evaluated as 0.00, that means a draw. The game indeed terminated with a draw. What the controversy is about?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-02-19T21:44:57.327Z
Comments.Text: Can you give any more info about the analysis?  Another site (https://www.chessbomb.com/arena/2021-tata-steel-masters/13-Firouzja_Alireza-Wojtaszek_Radoslaw) shows Stockfish 11 analysis above 1.0 prior to move 61.
Comments.UserDisplayName: BowlOfRed
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-02-19T22:54:30.583Z
Comments.Text: Of course I do NOT have Stockfish 12 NNUE , and maybe neither the time to go as far as depth =61. It is simply what was appearing in Houdini 6.02 interface, which has in memory the latest three in - depth analysis other people have done in that position. It too suggested Qd3 for White, but is evaluated 0.00 at depth 61. Or maybe you have confused depth 61 with the 61th move of the game. It seems to me obvious that a depth 61 analysis is more accurate than a depth 24 analysis , although I have to admit that , if truly the position is evaluated as 1.44 at depth 24 it may be difficult to defend.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Stefano
Tags: <tournament>
Title: The controversy about Firoujza game
ThreadText: # The controversy about Firoujza game
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-02-19)
  
  The tournment director apologied to Firoujza for moving his game on move 60. However, according to Stockfish 12 NNUE d=61the position on the board just before the players moved is evaluated as 0.00, that means a draw. The game indeed terminated with a draw. What the controversy is about?
  
  **Tags:** tournament
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Can you give any more info about the analysis?  Another site (https://www.chessbomb.com/arena/2021-tata-steel-masters/13-Firouzja_Alireza-Wojtaszek_Radoslaw) shows Stockfish 11 analysis above 1.0 prior to move 61.  
  > **username_0**: Of course I do NOT have Stockfish 12 NNUE , and maybe neither the time to go as far as depth =61. It is simply what was appearing in Houdini 6.02 interface, which has in memory the latest three in - depth analysis other people have done in that position. It too suggested Qd3 for White, but is evaluated 0.00 at depth 61. Or maybe you have confused depth 61 with the 61th move of the game. It seems to me obvious that a depth 61 analysis is more accurate than a depth 24 analysis , although I have to admit that , if truly the position is evaluated as 1.44 at depth 24 it may be difficult to defend.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2021-02-19. Score: 3
  
  Computer evaluation is based on perfect play from both sides, which is never the case in human games, and hence is irrelevant here. Given the nature of the position and the time situation, it is crystal clear that Firouzja had the "psychological" advantage, which he could've converted had the game been continued smoothly. Playing with a rook and an unsafe king against the bishop pair under time pressure is a nightmare for every chess player. Maneuvering with the two bishops is much easier. All this, in addition to other factors such as Firouzja's tournament position, makes up the post-game controversy that has arisen.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2021-02-19. Score: 1
  
  [https://chess24.com/en/read/news/tata-steel-chess-apologise-to-firouzja-after-controversy#:~:text=An%20incident%20involving%2017%2Dyear,on%20chess24%20and%20social%20media](https://chess24.com/en/read/news/tata-steel-chess-apologise-to-firouzja-after-controversy#:%7E:text=An%20incident%20involving%2017%2Dyear,on%20chess24%20and%20social%20media).
  
  this is the answer to your question
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_4**: This appears to be a link-only answer which may become useless if the link rots.  Instead, it would be more useful to future visitors if you summarize the relevant content here and provide the link.  
  
  ---
  
  