Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:19:53 04/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 18, 2001 at 18:44:27, Dann Corbit wrote: >On April 18, 2001 at 18:33:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 18, 2001 at 14:22:26, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>Big mistake. >>> >>>Draw out the big fish any way you can, and grovel on your knees over barbed wire >>>and broken glass to get them. >>> >>>Give them whatever it takes to make the match happen (but nothing more than >>>that). >>> >>>Mega matches like this are as rare as hen's teeth. Should we really tell them >>>to take a hike? >>> >>>Unfair? Sure, but interesting none-the-less. >> >> >>If it were me, I would probably play. But I would also feel perfectly free >>to change things between rounds. Agreement or no agreement. I also would >>feel perfectly free to make changes to the program up to the time of the >>match. >> >>The current set of requirements is completely ridiculous... >> >>I wouldn't feel compelled to adhere to such nonsense. > >I think changing the opening book should be plenty to put things round-about. > >Just give an extra wide "play anything" book with the original system, and use a >debugged smaller book for the contest. > >Better yet, filter out all the sensible openings and make the "demo system" play >1. f3 all the time. >;-) > >No changes to the program needed, I think. Don't underestimate GM players. They will find the strategic weakness and then beat you over the head with them. Over and over and over, once they spot one. If you can't fix it, look out. And if a GM has 3 months to look, it would be hopeless...
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.