Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: David Bronstein's Insight

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 10:46:50 02/10/00

Go up one level in this thread


On February 10, 2000 at 04:41:32, Alvaro Polo wrote:

>I agree with everything except that they can improve the play of most people. I
>believe that the play of most people is unimprovable by any means, after some
>years of practice. Of course there will always be exceptions, and possibly you
>can improve a little through titanic efforts, but generally speaking, my
>experience and the experience of most chessplayers that I know is that you don't
>improve significantly no matter what you try.

I started playing against a weak computer when I was in high school, back when a
weak computer meant a really really weak computer.  I immediately discovered
that if I left a piece en-prise, that the computer would take it, and my game
would disintegrate.  This also happened if I dropped an important pawn early on.
 The people I had been playing up until this time were too weak to punish me for
doing this, but the computer didn't miss this kind of stuff.  I also learned
about forks, pinned pieces, and simple attacking themes like winning on the
e-file when the opponent is too slow castling.  I improved very rapidly by
simply playing against this dumb computer until I could beat the tar out of it.
I think that anybody could do this.

I don't know what the average person gains by playing against a modern program
at full strength, but I still learn something when I play against them, even
though I'm not very strong.  I'm convinced that if I actually cared about
playing chess, that I could lever myself up a class by playing strong programs
often.

So I think my statement is true.

bruce



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.