Author: Jonas Cohonas
Date: 06:16:45 11/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 2001 at 09:09:56, Mark Young wrote: >On November 08, 2001 at 09:00:15, Jonas Cohonas wrote: > >>On November 08, 2001 at 08:55:40, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>On November 08, 2001 at 08:49:13, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>> >>>>On November 08, 2001 at 08:32:02, Mark Young wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 08, 2001 at 07:54:59, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 08, 2001 at 06:59:22, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On November 08, 2001 at 06:35:18, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Can anyone here beat the "best" prog in 40/120 without using anti comp >>>>>>>>strtegies? on atleast an Athlon 1000? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I have seen a lot of post where people draw the comps when trying to do nothing >>>>>>>>but that, but i am yet to see someone not using anti comp strategies beat them >>>>>>>>in a 40/120 on fast hardware..... anyone up for the challenge? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>What's the point of not playing anticomputer strategies? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-- >>>>>>>GCP >>>>>> >>>>>>The point being: 1. A GM of conciderable strength would not play anti comp. >>>>> >>>>>You don't know the history of computers Vs. GM players. This is not correct. >>>>> >>>>>[Event "Chess Meeting 2000 Super"] >>>>>[Site "Dortmund"] >>>>>[Date "2000.07.12"] >>>>>[Round "5"] >>>>>[White "Kramnik, Vladimir"] >>>>>[Black "Junior 6"] >>>>>[Result "1-0"] >>>>>[ECO "D00"] >>>>>[WhiteElo "2770"] >>>>>[PlyCount "65"] >>>>>[EventDate "2000.07.07"] >>>>> >>>>>1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 e6 4. f4 Be7 5. Nf3 c5 6. c3 O-O 7. Nbd2 Ng4 8. Qe2 >>>>>c4 9. Bc2 f5 10. Rg1 Nc6 11. h3 Nf6 12. g4 Ne4 13. Qg2 g6 14. Qh2 Kh8 15. h4 >>>>>Nxd2 16. Bxd2 fxg4 17. Ng5 Qe8 18. h5 gxh5 19. Rxg4 Rf6 20. Rh4 Rh6 21. O-O-O >>>>>a5 22. Rh1 b5 23. Bd1 Ra7 24. Bxh5 Qf8 25. e4 Bd8 26. f5 b4 27. Bg6 Rxh4 28. >>>>>Qxh4 bxc3 29. bxc3 Bf6 30. Qxh7+ Rxh7 31. Rxh7+ Kg8 32. Bf7+ Qxf7 33. Rxf7 1-0 >>>> >>>>My dad tought me 4 years ago that the stonewall (in this case transposed) was >>>>the way to beat comps, cause he had used this line to beat comps since the >>>>70's!! >>>>> >>>>>[Event "Chess Meeting 2000 Super"] >>>>>[Site "Dortmund"] >>>>>[Date "2000.07.15"] >>>>>[Round "8"] >>>>>[White "Junior 6"] >>>>>[Black "Piket, Jeroen"] >>>>>[Result "0-1"] >>>>>[ECO "B15"] >>>>>[BlackElo "2649"] >>>>>[PlyCount "68"] >>>>>[EventDate "2000.07.07"] >>>>> >>>>>1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. h3 a6 6. Bf4 Nf6 7. e5 Nfd7 8. Qd2 e6 >>>>>9. Bg5 Qb6 10. O-O-O h6 11. Be3 Qc7 12. h4 b5 13. Bf4 Nb6 14. a3 N8d7 15. Kb1 >>>>>a5 16. Na2 Qa7 17. g4 Bf8 18. c3 Ba6 19. Qe1 Nc4 20. Bd2 Be7 21. Nc1 Ndb6 22. >>>>>h5 g5 23. Na2 Kd7 24. Bc1 Rhb8 25. Ka1 b4 26. Nd2 Nxd2 27. Bxd2 Bxf1 28. Rxf1 >>>>>Nc4 29. Rb1 b3 30. Nc1 Bxa3 31. Qd1 Qb6 32. bxa3 b2+ 33. Ka2 bxc1=N+ 34. Qxc1 >>>>>Qxb1+ 0-1 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>2.If a program has a fault which can be taken advantage of by using anti comp >>>>>>strategies making it look like a 2000 player there is no point in playing it. >>>>> >>>>>You don't know if anti-computer play will work until you try it. ChessTiger did >>>>>not have any problem with anti-computer play...that resulted in a loss when it >>>>>scored a TPR of 2788. >>>> >>>>My point was not: see if you can find new anti comp stretegies, my point was: >>>>can anyone beat a prog (top 5) when not using anti comp, meaning: playing it >>>>like any other opponent! >>>> >>>>>>just like using the same line to beat the comp to determine it's strength. >>>>>>3. Is anyone here capable of beating the comp under these conditions?? >>>>> >>>>>Anticomputer play should be used if the player wishes. You don't know if >>>>>anti-computer play will work or not. Besides there are many types of >>>>>anti-computer play, and it would not be fair to claim or not claim anti-computer >>>>>play if the human wins. >>>>> >>>>I did not say that in general people should not be allowed the use of anti comp >>>>play. >>>>I repeat myself: can anyone here beat a top 5 prog without using anti comp >>>>strategies at 40/120 on fast hardware? >>> >>>You could claim anti-computer on any human win....That is the point, but I say >>>even with anti-computer play no one here is good enough to beat ChessTiger even >>>with anti-computer play. >>> >>>> >>>>Regards >>>>Jonas >> >>And any human v human win could be concidered anti human too, don't you see the >>difference between playing the board and playing the man? > >You are asking a question for which we already know the answer. There is no one >here good enough to beat a top program under your conditions. It seems if you >are not in the top 100 best chess players in the world you don't stand a chance >beating a top program in a match without using anti-computer play. > >Even with anti-computer play and a top 100 GM player you still may not win, as >GM Huebner found out. >> >>Regards >>Jonas I am not trying to find an answer i already know, i would love to see someone here pull it off so to speak. Regards Jonas
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.