Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 07:22:09 11/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 2005 at 10:01:04, George Tsavdaris wrote: >On November 12, 2005 at 09:40:48, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>On November 12, 2005 at 09:25:39, George Tsavdaris wrote: >> >>>> >>>>Note that I had access to Fritz 9 evaluation during the game. >>> >>> If you looked at _your_ replies and that affected your decisions during the >>>game, then the game is of no value....... >> >>What do you mean by "looked at _your_ replies"?? >>I simply didn´t close the engine tab during the game since that certainly makes >>it a lot easier for me to exploit the weaknesses of the program. >> >>My goal was not to prove that I am stronger than Fritz, my goal was to prove >>that 2.Qh5 is a good move against computers. > >2.Qh5 is not a very wise choice for white from a theoretical point of view. I agree, but a clear cut refutation does not exist either. With the white pieces you probably can afford to play such a nonsense move. > Yet you can succeed in making such a killer 2.Qh5-book that will win most of >the time against a today top engine. And this is because the today top engines >don't have good answers to their book for 2.Qh5. > But someone else can definitely make another anti-2.Qh5 book that would offer >strong replies to 2.Qh5 and since 2.Qh5 is not the best opening for white, then >your 2.Qh5-book would not be effective.......... Correct, but it can be very effective before that happens. >>I am able to create a book based on 2.Qh5 which is simply a killer book for >>computer vs. computer. > >Oh, now i understand.......You didn't play a normal game _alone_ against Fritz 9 >and won with 2.Qh5, but you tried to find moves with whatever way (and that was >by looking at Fritz's 9 evaluations), that would provide a win for white. That >is clear now! > >> >>>>Of course Fritz will play different moves in a tournament game >>> >>>What do you mean by "tournament game".....? >>> >>>>but I am sure it >>>>would be a matter of some hours to figure out how to beat top engines almost >>>>always in tournament games with 2.Qh5 for me. >>> >>> If this is true, then you are stronger than computers and i'm 100% sure that >>>this is not true. >> >>And I am 100% sure you don´t have a clue what you are talking about. > > I had a clue, but i misunderstood what you've said. I thought you have played a >normal game against Fritz 9 and won with 2.Qh5. But that was not the case.....It >was an experiment to show that Fritz 9 with black can lose at 10'/game with >2.Qh5........ > Also you claim that you can find a way that you can win all top engines by >playing this.....By restricting this "all" only to Fruit, Shredder, Fritz, >Junior, Hiarcs i think you will need around 7-8 months of continued analysis to >be able to win almost always and at a certain time control......! You can do it a lot quicker if you play some automatic engine tournaments with a shallow book at different time controls before you create the "deep" book. Michael >> >> >>So you should mean something else. What do you exactly mean? >>> >>> Saying that after 2.Qh5 that you can find how to beat all the time, all top >>>engines, means that: >>>1)2.Qh5 leads to a superior position for white >>>2)You are superior to computer top programs >>>3)Both 1) and 2) >>> >>>> >>>>Michael
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.