The first example is from an actual game, Larsen-Korchnoi, where White does manage to put the Knight on d5. The article includes that part of the game, it's a pretty funky manoeuvre.
That knight manoeuvre is actually what is played by the GMs in that (very real) game. Which means it's as realistic as it can get.
Even at GM level (perhaps especially at GM level) it's not uncommon to see 3-4 moves spent rerouting a knight to a better square.
Re:Using Stockfish to identify ideal squares
by adleyjulian on Saturday June 22, 2024 @11:48AM
(#40759891)
It's a closed position. You have time to reroute the knight and it's one of the few clear plans besides doubling the rooks on the only half open file.
The knight on that outpost was a monster and it ended up winning the game for him.
Re:Using Stockfish to identify ideal squares
by Scarblac on Saturday June 22, 2024 @12:18PM
(#40760115)
It's only four moves, Nf3-d2-b1-c3-d5.
(I don't know if that was the actual route taken in the game)
Re:Using Stockfish to identify ideal squares
by kthejoker2 on Saturday June 22, 2024 @12:35PM
(#40760235)
The board in the article is interactive you can actually play out Larsen's moves with the arrows underneath
Some interesting analysis here and how to approach the problem domain (pawn structure as a concern) but that first example, there is just no way to get that knight there in any reasonable way. Talking about unrealistic moves.