Author: Jeroen Noomen
Date: 10:39:35 08/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2003 at 09:21:07, Christian Kongsted. wrote: Hi Christian, Thanks for your quick answer! Let me first emphasis that I like your book a lot and that it is a good contribution to the present state of chess. Indeed, you'll find no chessbook on the subjects you have described, so you deserve credit to be the first one to write a serious book on it! Especially I like your recommendations how to use a computer for analysis, as I am doing exactly the same thing as you describe in your book. The combination good player + strong chess program can get very good analysis results. But the player should dictate things, not the program. Of course I know that putting a book together always will lead to space problems, as a result of which some topics will get less room than others. Still, I think you can only reach valid conclusions about the opening books when you: a) thoroughly investigate them (quite some job with those huge books), b) know how they were made. When I read your opinion about this, I can only tell you from my own 14 year experience 'this is not how it is done'. And I think you underestimate the strength of the best books. A De Gorter, Kure or Necchi book can present strong players with nasty surprises. Anyway, people tend to disagree and I have absolutely no problem with that! Nor do I feel offended, or something like that. Best wishes, Jeroen >Thanks for your interesting comments on the book 'How to Use Computers to >Improve Your Chess" > >First of all, I am sorry that you felt that too little space was dedicated to >the subject of opening books. I can only say that when you have 192 pages and >want to cover several aspects of computer chess, you need to give some issues >more priority than others. > >In general, my point of view is that computer opening books is an area of >computer chess where there is room for improvement. I don't mean to criticize or >provoke anyone here or devalue some of the good work which is being done by >creators of the opening books. It is just a statement - a point of view. > >But let me answer point by point: > >1. Note that I am speaking about computer programs in general, not only about >the absolute top. I am aware that years have been invested in the opening books >of the absolute top programs (e.g. I know Dan Wulff personally, and I believe he >has done a great job with the Gandalf book, which has taken many years to >develop) > >2. In my book (on p. 82) I include a well-known example from the Blitz world >champions between Fritz and Nimzo, in which both computers are following a game >from the database, which was entered erroneously in the original source (TWIC). >If you tell me that you are not working like this Jeroen, I naturally believe >it, but apparently other people are. > >3. "The opening book operators are not necessarily strong players and thus might >be having trouble identifying which lines are viable and which are not." > >Although there are some good exceptions, I believe this statement to be true. > >4. "Generally, strong players do not have to fear the opening book of the >computer." > >I also stand by that statement, although it may of course seem slightly >provoking to some people. My general point of view is that a 2600-grandmaster >can make much better preparations than a weaker player and he knows much more >about the current trends and evaluations of opening theory. If he plays his >normal lines against the program, he should not fear the opening book (note >however, that he may still have good reasons to fear or at least respect the >engine!) I agree that a single-game preparation with a sharp off-beat variation >is a very strong weapon for the opening book operator, and I am sure that this >can be used to a good effect. > >Thanks for your point of view and for your recommendation, even though you do >not agree with me in all the points mentioned above. > >Christian Kongsted
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.