Author: Uri Blass
Date: 20:42:10 06/03/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 03, 2005 at 22:40:19, Vikrant Malvankar wrote: >On June 02, 2005 at 16:37:52, Jonas Cohonas wrote: > >>>Why do u leave out Anand and Topalov? >> >>I don't, i just don't think their man v machine experiences compare to what >>Adams is going to face. >>And i hope you can see that even if they did, the rest of the top 10 field does >>not. >> >>>Anand played and won against Rebel in Classical Games even though they were less >>>and played 7 years ago, Anand's strength has also improved over a period of time >>>and he will be sucessful. Infact the match(Hydra vs Any Human Top Player) should >>>have been after the World Championship between the winner of the World >>>Chamiponship. >> >>Anand v Rebel? Rebel was no where near the strength of Hydra. > >I agree that Rebel can not be compared to Hydra but as such Adams can not be >compared to Anand, he will outperform Adams any day and he is the best Blitz and >Rapid player of the world and Human race's best bait against Machine in Rapid nd >Blitz. Anand is only slightly better than adams. >bt tell me Adam's experience in this regard. He has never played officially >against Computer and just one game Against DJ(if i remember correctly.) Adams already drew an official game against Junior in Dortmund in 2000. Note that Anand also drew against Junior in the same tournament. I remember that Adams beated Junior at blitz in the same opening in his preperation but Junior played better at longer time control and adams could not win. Adams assumed that machines are better at blitz relatively to humans and if he has no problem to beat Junior at blitz at some opening then he will have no problem to beat it at long time control. I guess that he learned from that experience. http://www.msoworld.com/mindzine/news/chess/dortmund2000.html >> >>"July-21 4 blitz games (5 minutes + 5 seconds Fischer for each move) and 2 >>semi-blitz games (15 minutes) >>July-22 1 tournament game (40/2:00, 1 hour) >>July-23 1 tournament game (40/2:00, 1 hour)" >> >>So four 5+5 games, two 15 min games and two standard games, to me that is not >>comparable to Adams v Hydra at all. Besides that anand lost the match 5-3. >>http://www.rebel.nl/anand.htm > >Ok bt what has Adams done? Anand won the Classical Match.(Pl. read the article >correctly). Now u will say that was inconclusivecos of only 2 games but so is >this match gonna be. IMHO Anand is a much better candidate and they should have >waited till after World Chamipoinship recently announced. >> >>>Topalov played Hydra,Junior and Fritz in Bilbao and performed really well, >>>currently he is at his best. >> >>Yes Topalov would be interesting to see against Hydra, but i don't think he has >>more of a chance to win than Adams. >> >>>>You also say: >>>> >>>>">One other disadvantage is that Adams can go through the Games of the Hydra >>>>>whciah were played by 16 processor clustor and not the 32 Processor monster, >>>>>whether he will be able to find any weaknesses? I doubt that the same weaknesses >>>>>will be there in 32 processor clustor that is going to play the match." >>>> >>>>Assuming this makes a difference in how a strong human would prepare against >>>>Hydra, then i would like to point out that these circumstances would be exactly >>>>the same no matter who plays Hydra and i don't see why you use that as an >>>>example of how Adams is the weakest to face the computer... >>>> >>>>Last but not least, you did not say (previously) that Adams was the weakest GM >>>>to face Hydra, you said he was the weakest GM in the top 10, i see that you >>>>changed your mind on this. >>> >>>No i still believe that he is the weakest, if u study his games carefully u will >>>always find him avoiding sharp tactics and that is the strength of the >>>Computers. Ivanchuk,Bacrot,Swidler,Polgar are better at tactics then him and are >>>less likely to make blunders against Computers. Kasparov,Anand,u simply can not >>>compare with Adams, as they are class apart. Topalov,Leko are better on current >>>form. >> >>You say that he always avoid sharp tactics, well i don't agree with that >>assumption, however let's assume that he does then that would be a good thing >>against computers right? ;) your arguments seem selfcontradict. > >Sorry u did not get it correctly,He has the tendancy to avoid Tactics in Sharp >positions, his tactical eye is little weak and that means he is most likely to >blunder in a game vs Hydra. I see no basis to that claim. Peter Leko and not adams missed mate in 1 in the an active match that they played in the last days. Uri
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.