Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:52:45 11/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 2001 at 11:15:38, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >On November 08, 2001 at 11:09:08, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On November 08, 2001 at 10:33:23, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >> >>>On November 08, 2001 at 10:31:41, Christopher R. Dorr wrote: >>> >>>>That *is* the point. I know every master in my area. When I play one who is weak >>>>in the ending, I try to exploit that, just as he knows me, and tries to exploit >>>>my weaknesses. When I play Tiger, I know it is relatively weak if I can lock the >>>>pawns (as an example). To you, this is 'anti-computer' play. To me, I am playing >>>>it just like I would *anybody else*; going after it's weaknesses and avoid it's >>>>strengths. To me, that is normal chess. >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>> >>>>Chris >>>> >>>I mean anti comp openings, sorry if i was not clear about that, but i thought >>>that was implicit. >> >>So, that means forbidding certain openings for the human? >>Then the computer should play without book ;-) >> >In this case yes, the challenge implies that (not in general though), and sure >i wouldn't mind holding up my end of the challenge, and furthermore not using >the comp book. > >Regards >Jonas You can try playing the nunn match between computers and humans. 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.