Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess Openings Theory and Practice vs. MCO 14

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 13:30:03 01/19/01

Go up one level in this thread


Hello,

Get NCO 99 or NCO 2000 and you'll completely fry nearly
every line in MCO 14.

I don't see the connection between refutations in NCO
of old lines and using CM8000 without using that book.

On January 19, 2001 at 14:05:31, Dana Turnmire wrote:



>  I used to play in a few tournaments though not active now and always used I.A.
>Horowitz's book "Chess Openings Theory & Practice" as my "opening bible" when
>preparing for tournaments (I'm just a club player).  I was contantly told that
>it was outdated and practically ANY opening manual was outdated in a short
>period of time because opening theory was constantly changing.
>  I recently went out and bought a copy of MCO 14 to test it side by side with
>my old standby.  I have CM 8000 on an AMD k6-2/500 64 RAM.  I took ten opening
>variations from the Ruy Lopez section in both books and used only the variations
>in which White had a "clear advantage" (a plus sign over one minus sign).  I
>then let CM 8000 play out the game.
>  RESULTS: In Chess openings Theory and Practice White had 7 wins 2 draws and 1
>loss.  MCO 14 had 5 wins 3 draws and 2 losses.
>  Is a strong master today any more capable of analyzing an opening position any
>better than a strong master 37 years ago?  It doesn't seem to be the case.
>  I always liked the layout of "Chess Openings Theory and Practice" better than
>the modern counterparts.  Is there any possibility it can be updated with
>algebraic notation in the future?  Would anyone like to try this challenge with
>NCO, ECO or any other highly regarded openings manual?



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.