Author: Alastair Scott
Date: 04:10:12 11/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2003 at 14:03:37, Dana Turnmire wrote: >It seems obvious that computers get lost in closed positions and anti-computer >play. Even low ranked players have had some success against top programs using >unorthodox play. How in heavens name can one of the greatest players in history >not prepare openings that are known to give computers problems? It seems any >grandmaster could lock up the position where long term strategy is the key. Is >this not possible against Fritz? If not then Kasparov should not be criticized >because when it comes to tactics the computers rule. Because only a small subset of opening sequences lead to such positions and, I suspect, most computer opening books are deliberately written to keep away from them. My beta testing of Chess Genius for Palm showed me that its opening book is most cleverly constructed to push games towards semi-open positions ... And the steer can be on move 1; for example, after 1. e4 c5, White will have trouble making a closed position in any form; even the Closed Sicilian is barely "closed" by the standards of game 3, for example. Alastair
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.