Author: Komputer Korner
Date: 09:52:25 08/15/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 12, 1998 at 23:00:58, Ed Schröder wrote: >>Posted by Francesco Di Tolla on August 12, 1998 at 00:49:28: > >>This is the point! >>May be I'm wrong, so I would apologize from now already for starting the >>thread, but what do you get from the followin sentence from the commentary >> (by Jeroen Noomen) on game 7 of the match Rebel-Anand after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6: > >>"I chose this opening because I wanted an unbalanced >>game for Rebel, relying on the surprise value. Playing a Queen's Indian >>or a Queen's gambit instead, was probably exactly Anand was hoping for. >>He knows too much about this opening, so lets play unorthodox!" > >>and at move 3 > >>"A small success: Anand avoids the main theoretical lines, starting with >>3 cxd5, 3 Nc3 or 3 Nf3." > >>Am I misunderstanding it? > >Hi Franz, > >Yes you misunderstand, let me explain.... > >In Man versus Machine games (like Rebel-Anand or the former Aegon >tournament) it is *not* allowed that the operator may influence the >game in any way. > >What Jeroen is talking about (and what is allowed) that you can load >another "opening book" BEFORE the game starts. Of course it is >not allowed to switch opening books during the game by the operator. > >An example, say you want to open with 1.e4 because you have lost >the previous game with 1.d4 then simply load another opening book >which has 1.e4 set to active and the rest of the moves on "non-active". > >In this way in his preparation for the match Jeroen had made 5 opening >books for the Rebel white repertoire and 5 for the black repertoire. > >A good example was the Tschigorin defence in game-7 (1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6) > >In this opening book (loaded before Anand played 1.d4) the only reply to >1.d4 for black is 1..d5 just hoping Anand would play 2.c4 and so he did. >Then the only active move was 2..Nc6 and so we had the Tschigorin >defence which we considered good for Rebel. > >So that's the way it goes in human versus computer events to escape >from human preparations against Rebel. Since Rebel's opening book is >generally available Rebel is an easy victim for opening preparation. > >To participate in human versus computer events you simply must have >*another* opening repertoire if you want to have a good result. > >Hope this explains a little, feel free to ask if something is unclear yet. > >- Ed - > >>regards >>Franz There is another issue here that I never tire of pointing out. A computer program prepares it's opening by having it's human opening coder desperately trying to stay up on the latest theory. Jeroen does a great job on this in Ed's opinion. We won't argue with this opinion. Okay so far. However a super GM like Anand prepares openings by investigating far beyond the latest opening theory. There is a BIG difference. I don't know how computers will ever be able to get rid of this disadvantage. -- Komputer Korner
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.