Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 04:49:48 02/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2003 at 04:28:19, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On February 04, 2003 at 00:39:05, Peter Kappler wrote: > >[snip] > >>If you think Kasparov is intentionally playing bad moves to keep the match >>interesting, please point out the mistakes along with the clearly better move he >>could have played. I can only think of 32. Rh5 and 33. Ng6+, both from game 3, >>and the refutation is a fairly deep and complex line - the kind that even >>Kasparov can miscalculate. > >There are nuances between "playing your best chess" and "intentionally making >bad moves". > >If I play against my engine, I don't play bad moves intentionally, but I know >that I won't be too unhappy when I lose the game and that has an influence on my >subconsciousness and for example makes me take more risks than I would do in a >tournament game. I want to win in both games, but in the tournament game I want >to win more.. > >Not everyone who doesn't believe that humans play their very best chess is >necessarily a conspiracy theorist. > >Sargon > >PS. I do believe that these games are of value apart from the entertainment >part. It's just not black or white. :) All well said: Now let me give some evidence. In the 4th game, a hedgehog, it is common knowledge that as Black you must find a counter attack by d5 for instance. If you don't, and Kasparov didn't, you get strangled. Now people said, and I guess Kasparov will also do that, that against a comp you should pay attention NOT to sac a pawn or such. But that is exactly the proof what I want to have. If you can't sac a pawn against DJ, then why playing the hedgehog? Just to see how you get almost strangled? As it was in that game after b6? QED Rolf Tueschen
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.