Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:03:08 09/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 07, 2000 at 16:23:49, Marc van Hal wrote: >How do I have to see my work >Some people here said the said something and later on had to take there words >back >I have never come in such a position >But if there is something seriouly wrong with it I am sure you should have >written about it >Lets face it this site is highly critical. (Me included) >But actualy my question is in wich kind of catogery you think I belong in >acording to anelyzes and give an example >a)bad >B)average >c)great >d)super >e)Extreem > >It is because indeed I think I am verry good in this why I made all my postings >To contribute something of importance to chess and not to my ego (ok also to my >ego but not on the first place) >If it is so many people say I am not verry good in what I do I won't post here >any more cause then it only takes webpage room >like some other people do here ( I won't metion any names but ok) I did not say that you are not good in what you do(I understand it is mainly analysis of opening) and I admit that I simply do not know. My main interest in computer chess is about cases when programs have wrong evaluation or cannot see tactics because of wrong search rules and not about books. I believe that it is not very hard to escape from opening preperation by choosing unpopular lines (Examples is shredder's choice 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.f3 or kasparov choice against deeper blue 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d6) Your book can be productive when programs go for the main lines but I believe that a better engine is more important because in this case it is not hard to do a book that let you to escape from preperations of the opponents. 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.