Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: David Bronstein's Insight

Author: Alvaro Polo

Date: 11:30:06 02/10/00

Go up one level in this thread


On February 10, 2000 at 13:46:50, Bruce Moreland wrote:

>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

I never said your statement was false, just that I didn't agree with something
you said. I don't know if the statement is false or true, since I don't know the
reality that much.

My experience with computers is similar, but once I reached the 1800 level
progress stopped. I believe that there are plateaus in every activity, why not
in chess?

It is clear that I am the only one holding this opinion in the neighborhood. I
admit that programs can *perhaps* help someone reach his level of incompetence
sooner, but beyond that I have too many doubts.

Alvaro



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.