Author: walter irvin
Date: 09:36:42 12/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 2000 at 11:35:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 13, 2000 at 06:06:26, Lin Harper wrote: > >>On December 12, 2000 at 22:12:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 12, 2000 at 18:15:14, Mike S. wrote: >>> >>>>On December 12, 2000 at 16:19:27, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>(...) >>>>> >>>>>The real problem is that GMs that are not in the top 100 give programs fits on >>>>>ICC all the time. I won't mention names, but it is common. Because they tend >>>>>to play the opponent, which is perfectly normal. I don't think a GM would care >>>>>_which_ computer he has to play, but he would certainly want to know that he >>>>>is playing a computer (I think computers are more similar than most would give >>>>>them credit for being). >>>> >> >> What's Roman Dzhindi's handle on ICC? > > >Roman plays anonymously on ICC, and I always respect such a request from >GM players, so that I don't reveal their handles. You might pick some of >the top engines, do a "history" on them, and see if you find a common >opponent that wins more games than usual. :) > > > > >>>>I'd be interested, what your opinion is from watching these ICC GM games: What >>>>is the most important, or most often successfully used anti-computer strategy? >>>>Is it >>>> >>>>a) avoiding tactics and using superior positional knowledge >>>>b) following long-term ideas or plans, which the computer fails to understand >>>>c) preparing for a king attack slowly, and the computer defends too late >>>>d) looking for a transition into a better endgame, or >>>>e) something else (?) >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>>M.Scheidl >>> >>> >>>The idea is to first block the position. Normally you would first block the >>>center, then as the computer tries something on the queenside, you take every >>>opportunity to block things there, or, on occasion, let the queenside sorty >>>draw the computer's queen offside chasing a pawn. It then can leave itself >>>wide open for a slowly developing kingside attack. The rule of thumb is _first_ >>>position your pieces, and _then_ push the pawns. Because the program will >>>see what is going on once the pawns start moving. If you do it right, it will >>>be too late. >>> >>>Another strategy is to simply block the position completely, keeping yourself >>>one pawn break to play at the right time. Generally programs will not >>>understand the position and will be out of position when the break comes. >>> >>>A good person to watch is Roman Dzhindi... He is very good at this sort of >>>playing, and drives programs into the ground if they don't try _very_ hard to >>>prevent the blocked position early... all this anti-computer stategy is great ,but you as a programmer and the one with prob the most experience vs humans ,have any ideas or suggestions on a ANTI-HUMAN stategy that would help computers turn the tables on humans .i mean if there are positions where computers dont play well , then there must also be positions where computers are much better ??? maybe a good match between opening book and eval ??????????
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.