Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 06:39:19 02/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 09, 2001 at 08:22:42, Garry Evans wrote: >Hi > > After re-reading all of IM weger comments about gambit tiger, it appears that >yes I did misread or misinterpret what he meant. I now see his main critisim was >in gambits lack of tablebases and learning. In Hannu's report of round 5 you can read the following: "In game 8 Gambit Tiger pulled out the cudgel with 16.b6!!. The idea is that White gains an important tempo for the attack (the bishop on b5 cannot be easily attacked). In addition the black queenside rook remains inactive. If Kasparov had produced such an improvement in a match then the chess press would be full of praise for his analytical skills. So what are we to think about a tin can that apparently has the ability to learn and improve its play at a specific point?" The report ends with "I must confess that the move 16.b6!! in game 8 made a Tiger fan out of me." Hannu is a fan of Gambit Tiger, something he made clear in his published comments and that I also know from private emails. I'm not surprised he likes it so much. Enrique
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.