Author: Mark Ryan
Date: 21:35:43 04/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2000 at 14:21:37, James Robertson wrote: >It is funny because Anand stomped Karpov in an advanced match by a score I don't >think could have happened without the computers (remember Karpov had beaten >Anand for the FIDE title just a year earlier). > >In this case the computer was anything but an equalizer! I think as a result of >strange results like this it is impossible to predict how such a match would >work out. > >For instance, is a 2500's positional skill really as good as a 2800 player? Is >the only difference in strength tactical? Kramnik routinely squashes 2700 >players positionally, without a hint of tactical play. The extra >tactical help may not change the result against some players very much. > >James Hi: Agreed. And Advanced Chess introduces another factor: efficient handling of the computer during play. Kasparov and Topalov studied different things with Fritz during the games, and both got into time trouble while spending a lot of time on the machine in some games (Kasparov even sorted and saved a lot of the computer analysis during play for later study!) Mark
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.