Author: Howard Exner
Date: 06:42:07 07/31/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 31, 1998 at 07:46:47, Komputer Korner wrote: >I am only quoting Knut Neven's database as a better repository of games. That >has nothing to do with the opening book argument. That is point no. 1 Point no. >2 is that Jeroen will never be able to keep up with guys like Anand as far as >preparing openings is concerned. We are all forgetting just how important >opening theory is to top flight chess. Opening theory is not about only >collecting all the games and making a repertoire from those games. It is >thousands of hours of investigation beyond what was played to develop sound >novelties and lines of play that go far beyond the book. Super GM's do this as a >matter of course. Others cannot hope to match this. They can try and they may >think they have done it, but I will bet you dollars to doughnuts that all the >top (non OTB GM ) correspondence players would get crushed in the opening >against a Super GM. I don't care how much time they have spent. They just can't >compete against a Super GM. We all vastly underestimate the talent and hard work >Super GM's put into the study of openings. So where does that leave the poor >micro who can't develop a repertoire except by trial and error?. Well, if it >gets fast enough and if it gets smart enough and if its team of programmers and >opening assistants work hard enough and they are talented enough then maybe they >will have a chance some day. The steps from your IMs and your average GM's to >the super GM's are large indeed. Jaap van den Herik seems to forget about this >in his editorial in the latest ICCA journal. This post says at the top , in reply to Howard Exner. What comments of mine are you replying to? It's hard to follow the continuity of our exchange when the entire post has been snipped.
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.