Author: Tony Werten
Date: 00:59:03 04/20/01
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 Dan, that's too obvious. Give a "normal" book which in general has a lot of vague gambits with their refutations. Then take out the refutations. The GM will find tens or hundreds of ways to kill the program, keeping him busy for a while. Tony > >No changes to the program needed, I think.
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.