Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Gambit tiger

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 06:57:10 10/18/00

Go up one level in this thread


On October 18, 2000 at 09:05:45, Bas Hamstra wrote:

>Albert,
>
>Thanks for your long post.
>
>I am sorry I am so hard to convince. In the dutch open I see indeed an attacking
>game against Nimzo. I am not impressed by it, just well tuned speculative
>evaluation. Now let's see the other strong opponents:
>
>- Against The King it was within 10 moves in the endgame

It is not tiger's fault that the king decided to go to a bad endgame.
What did you expect from tiger?
Did you expect it to avoid trading queens to a better endgame?

>- Bloodless draw against Quest
>
>The others don't count, they are all weak amateurs that are badly outsearched.
>
>Furhter I don't think Tiger-Nimzo is any more special than King-Nimzo.

I disagree.
please post the move in king-nimzo that no program plays.

Uri



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.