Author: Sune Larsson
Date: 09:59:05 11/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 05, 1999 at 12:14:48, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On November 05, 1999 at 09:42:57, Alexander Kure wrote: > >>Never thought of me being a king's indian fan ;-) >>When Nimzo crushed Shredder in Paderborn 98 with the Belgrade Gambit was I >>supposed to be a Belgrade Gambit fan? >>The truth is that the King's Indian, like the Sicilian, is an opening which >>leads to unbalanced positions where the 'better' program, the program which >>handles the position better, will succeed. > >better prepared ! >but look: >some programs win because they are prepared to special positions, because >they KNOW something about e.g. king-attack. >if i let them play in a closed game, no captures, >and the opponent gives no chance to king attack by overprotecting pieces >and careful keeping position close than what shall the king-attacker do? > >other programs outsearch the opponent. >if you choose a position that is unbalanced and needs e.g. a special knowledge >to handle it, and the opponent does not know about this because >it normally wins with outsearching, than you have made a trap, if you >recognize it or not. > > >>If you play unbalanced positions >>better be prepared for them! > >i prefer to choose the opening i am prepared for. >and not let the opponent chose the opening HE is prepared for. >why shall i give the initiative and the action to my opponent ? > > >> If you are not prepared playing specific positions >>arising after specific openings - simply do not play them. > >aha. i will tell this to tiger ! don't play te openings you are not >prepared to play :-)) > >>As Computer chess programs cannot play chess it is always a challenge for me to >>select openings where they will not ruin too much by playing the arising >>positions. This has nothing to do with setting traps. > >what you call "it is always a challenge for me to select openings where" > >IS the trap of the thing. > >of course there is no primitive trap... the trap is YOU choosing an opening >you call : an opening not easy to handle for programs. > >I expect you know how Nimzo handles it against several programs, am i right ? >you have - i guess so - seen many chess-programs trying to survive >with white against nimzo having black, right ? and from what you have >seen you laugh and chose this opening, because you know that PRGS >have problems to understand the idea. BECAUSE it is unbalanced. >Because the horizont-effect damages whites efforts to defend. > >And therefore: simsalabim: the trap is YOU. > >But jeroen could have done the same thing. and i am sure he has prepared >to. but he thought you would play something else. >So - in the end we have a duell jeroen vs. alex. >I would have preferred a game tiger - quest instead. >therefore I would have thrown black early out of book and watched >out what THE ENGINES play. > >>The game Tiger vs. Quest was a classical example of how to handle a king's >>attack. To me it was the best game in the Dutch Open so far. > >hm. >which move/position black was out of book ? >What was the first computed move of quest ? >When was tiger out of book ? > >>By the way Quest is *not* using Nimzo's opening book. I created a new one for >>Fritz 6. This is the book they use in Leiden. > >ok. i meant that YOU decided what to play. >remember your game against cstal in aegon or where it was. have forgotten. >all i know is that you played kingsindian and we talked about this >opening during the game or later, you remember ? > >I would like to see how CSTal would have played against my commercial >fritz6 .... but i need to know WHEN both tiger and quest left opening >books... > >Anyone knows WHEN ? Read somewhere that Quest left the book with 24.-f3. Or maybe more clear- 24.-f3 was told to be Quests preparation which threw Tiger out of book. Sune > > >>Greetings >>Alex
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.