Author: Ralf Elvsén
Date: 18:36:12 07/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 27, 2000 at 17:15:33, blass uri wrote: > >I do not see how you decide about the positional level of them. >They can often play very good positional moves(it may be because of search but >it does not change the fact that club players will probably lose against >computers even if they can aska computer if their move is a tactical >blunder(more than 1/2 pawn error) From my own experience (which is what counts for me :) this isn't true. I often play semi-blitz (5 10) against programs and get quite a few draws (I would guess 15% of the games). Very many of the other games are "almost draws" where I blunder in a dead even position (often an endgame). A blunder checker would give me draws in at least 50% of the games. About a year ago, when I for a while had two computers at home I played "advanced" (well...) chess. I let Hiarcs run on one computer and I used the other to analyze with Crafty. 6 games at 40/2 ended with 3 - 3, and I played for a win in all of these. Had I played for a draw I would be very surprised if I didn't get it most of the times. The problems with blunder checkers is that it's hard to manage time. One has to practise alot. I did often run up and down along lines without thinking the way one should when playing. On two occasions I lost a game because I didn't give Crafty enough time to find the blunder. Both where tactical shots I may had spotted myself if I had played alone :) So there is truth in what you say that a blunder checker doesn't solve all problems. It has to be used with care. > >The game of Steve Ham with black against nimzo is a good example because Steve >Ham did not do a clear tactical error(there was no big change in the evaluation >of nimzo) but Nimzo is probably going to win the game. > >It proves that even better than club players can have problems against computers >even without tactical mistakes. Yes, but as he pointed out, it's an unbalanced position. If he had played for a draw (i.e. not sacrificed the exchange, or first of all not played the dragon) I think he would have no problems at all. Strong players will certainly have problems winning (as I guess you meant). Not losing is another matter. Ralf > >Uri
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.