Author: Bas Hamstra
Date: 14:46:47 10/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 22, 2000 at 17:07:54, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 22, 2000 at 16:16:19, Bas Hamstra wrote: > >>On October 21, 2000 at 14:30:52, Thorsten Czub wrote: >> >>>Don't kill me - i am only joking ! Please don't start another >>>ideology battle :-))) here. >>> >>>Seems Gambit-Tiger plays not the weakest games... >> >>Well, maybe I exaggerated slightly when I said GT plays boring. But speculative >>eval is ANYTHING but a new paradigm. >> >>Only a pity that it thinks it needs killerlines in a tournament against >>amateurs. I mean bookmoves that are NO theory. I mean the continuation of >>unplayable moves, until it's basically mate in 10. See Tiger-Tao. > >The book moves in Tiger-Tao are theory moves. > >I looked in an old book like f5book.ctg and there are 2 replies for 12.exd5(Qa5 >and Bg7) > >Uri Yes. But Nxc2 is NOT theory, because it's deadly. It's the move to avoid. And GT had it in it's book, as well as even moves AFTER Nxc2. Up to the point that NeuroChess could have easily mated Deep Blue. Look, Cock the Gorter (opening specialist) stood behind me and said: "if you play Nxc2 the game is over. You will be mated instantly." Afterwards he seriously complimented me, for not being mated for 8 moves or so. Though I don't really blame 'em, it IS frustrating when you sit there. Now compare that to Roland (Patzer), who played with normal book in stead of killerbook against the amateurs. Had he killed amateurs like that, Patzer would have been ranked even higher. Ciao, Bas.
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.