Author: James T. Walker
Date: 17:15:45 12/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 2000 at 22:40:24, Fernando Villegas wrote: >In my Armada I have played some games against the so called "personalities" of >CM8000 and I wonder if those of you that have made the same has the feeling >that I have, in the sense that the ratings atribuyed to them are very >uncredible. I played a game against a supposed 2000 rated player, a girl called >"sunny" or Sony or whatever, who did not play better than a 1300 player at best. >I remembered the style of Chess Challenger 7 or so. I cannot imagine an expert >level player that does not develop his queen side in all the game, that block >his d pawn putting his king bishop in d3, that loses his castling without >resistance and so on. Seems like that the way to simulate a player is to do >really nasty moves followed by decent moves, but not the average kind of moves >fitted to the supposed elo of the opponent. >Anyway, it is funny AND sad to discover how difficult is to beat these low level >players. For a moment, looking with greed his awful moves, you get ambitious and >want to kill him at once, so you launch savage attacks that bounce against the >just enough defensive power of the program; then you try just to do good >positional moves and to crush him later; then you get bored of so an slow method >and lose interest, your concentration deteriorates and mediocre moves follows. >Move after move you see that you have an overwheelming better position, but >equally, instead of a killing, you are just in the middle of a nasty mess. >Well, I say "you" as it was a general law, but probably that happens only to a >mediocre player. That's me. So instead of getting the pleasure of beating very >fast a poor bastard, I have just lost time in an uninteresting and frustrating >game. I do not recomend the exercize to nobody that shares my "moral" defect. >There is something weird in being capable of getting a draw agaisnt mighty >adversaries like Tiger gambit, at least from time to time, but not being capable >of shooting in the head an idiotic virtual girl player that develops the bishop >to d3. I lost time, I did not enjoy, I got bored and a pulsating headache. So >the end of the "game" was not a flashy mate but me unplugging the PC in a sudden >movement of rash fury. How sad to discover that you are less a "such or such" >level player than a fragile, oscilating one easily contaminated by a weak >adversary. Is like believing you know some decent amount of high maths and the >you cannot get right a multiplication. Really good players does not suffer that >ailment: they just beat weak opponents in a few devastating moves. Maybe to >realize that is a good lesson after all, but I did not like it. >BTW, Happey Xtmas to all of you. > >Fernando Merry Christmas Fernando, The first lesson you must learn in chess is that you have no right to tell your opponent how to play. If your opponent plays stupid and still wins then where does that leave you/me? I have played people that played the same way (very crazy) and still beat me. I guess you don't like losing. Nothing wrong with that but it's just a game after all. Jim
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.