Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:53:17 04/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 25, 2000 at 07:11:28, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: [snip] >I guess you might describe blitz as no-chess or something different than "real" >(?) chess when people play, but the shortcomings of people at blitz don’t apply >to programs or they apply to a much lesser extent, and that’s why human players >have much better chances at slower time controls when playing computers. > >In my opinion, Christophe is making an interesting and coherent point, as he >usually does, about the value of blitz games and the relative harm of having >pondering on/off, and the games of Chessfun are very interesting in this regard, >I think. Next step would be questioning the alleged difference when programs >play against other programs or against people, another old "legend" >(Christophe’s terminology) of computer chess. Except for time to move, the rules of blitz are obviously the same as slower chess. But look at blitz games. Full of blunders and gaffes. It's ugly chess at its worst. I despise blitz. But others enjoy it. I see no reason for them not to have fun. But for me, it is like an afternoon watching two patzers who barely know the rules verses watching two GM's play. [snip]
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.