Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 13:56:11 07/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 2001 at 16:00:56, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >You didn't read carefully my previous post. Yes, I did. >Mr. Faber were claiming that Dr. Hubner hadn't previously played against comps , >that reply was against that argument. I know, but his argument against the anti-computer specialist name tag still stands. >The anticomps claim derives on the _fact_ that he were allowed to study and >prepare against DF , to discover weak points and strategies exploiting this >points. I am pretty sure that Dr. Hubner know quite well the comps and their >behaviour since 1990 ,as I wrote, so he isn't certainly an absolute beginner in >this field as you can imagine. Opportunity does not equal expert knowledge. To be an acknowledged anti-computer specialist requires demonstration. Nothing convincing demonstrated so far. Speculation about an unknown degree of study and preparation against Fritz along with a alledged knowledge of computer behaviour doesn't mean anything. So far everything suggests a "play it safe" approach by Hübner, where he can draw most opponents and then wait and see. Mogens.
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.