Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 16:27:32 05/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 14, 2000 at 18:56:45, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On May 14, 2000 at 18:38:46, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>A player of that caliber doesn't take unnecessary risks without knowing the >>implications, especially playing a game shorter than 60 minutes per side. what I >>am referring to is opening his position wide open against one of the most >>tactical monster ever created. If Fritz SSS would not have lost so many tempos >>moving his bishop so many times and instead would have chosen to centralize his >>pieces, Fritz SSS would have collected more human bones and donated to his >>programmer Frans as a collectible trophy. > >This doesn't exactly prove that Fritz would have beaten van Wely with a shorter >timespan. van Wely might have chosen another plan, or maybe he knows that Fritz >have problems with piece coordination in a certain type of position. Loosing >tempos wouldn't be less frequent if the timecontrol is shorter IMO. I don't know >how often a GM discards an intuitional move after calculation, which is a >problem when there's less time. > >Sincerely, >Mogens And so what if it does? Set 'em up at game in one minute and Fritz probably wins. There's a crossover point, certainly. By the way, Seirawan and Shirov could not only win like this, they could win using more natural human vs human play. I'm sure many others could, as well. 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.