Author: Jonas Cohonas
Date: 02:04:24 04/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 25, 2001 at 02:42:16, Tanya Deborah wrote: > > >Here is a little interview about * Kramnik-Junior 6 game * in the past Dortmund >GM tournament in where Kramnik beat Junior in a very easy way. > >Please read this : > > >ChessBase: Did you prepare for today’s game? > >Kramnik: Yes, it was generally my plan to get the computer into time trouble so >it would blunder something... > >CB: And seriously? >Kramnik: Okay, I played some training games with Fritz, and I tried all kinds of >setups, because to go for the main lines against the computer makes no sense at >all – you simply forget something and the computer never does this at all. That >is why you have to find an interesting setup where the computer can go wrong. I >tried several different things and finally decided that this setup is the best: >Stonewall, 1.d4 d5 2.e3 and then the computer always plays 2...Nf6 and after >3.Bd3 it is very good that the computer plays 3...e6. It is okay but it gives >you very pleasant type of play against the computer. Then you go 4.f4 and >finally you get what you want. I tried several setups, as I already mentioned, >but in this setup the computer was doing extremely badly. In one training game I >mated the computer very similar to this, even faster. I think in 25 moves. > > >CB: So actually you got what you wanted in the first four moves. > >Kramnik: That’s not the end of the story. I didn’t get any advantage out of the >opening, maybe my position was even slightly worse, but I was happy with it, >because it is exactly the position you need to get against the computer. The >objective evaluation doesn’t really matter so much. I expected the computer to >go wrong at some point and it did so. 13...g6 and 15...Nxd2 were very bad. But >it was very natural. In fact when I was backstage during the game I mentioned to >Piket that I think the computer will play Nxd2 at some point, because this is an >aweful positional move. And finally in two or three move the computer took on >d2. I simply understand the mentality of the computer and that is why I am so >successful. > >******************** > >The Interview is very CLEAR. > >I think, that the program that play against Kramnik in October will need to have >more than a Super fast computer. I think that it will be very good to make a >Special opening book to avoid some unknown openings that Kramnik will have >prepare for the machine. A new opening book-with some help by GrandMasters to >know how to play better against the best Anti computer technique by Kramnik. > >Kramnik will know very good the program and he will prepare for a secure win. > >I wish that the program can show to us a very good chess in October, and also I >will not like to see Kramnik winning almost all the games. > >Kramnik is very dangerous!!! with a copy of the program three months before!! >Please, we need to make something to avoid the disaster! > >Tanya Deborah. My dad had discovered that stonewall was good against the computer, about ten years ago and showed me how to play that opening three years ago, when i started playing chess (i have always known the moves, but never taken the game too seriously until 3 yrs ago) and i used to beat up chessmaster 5500 so bad with that opening. I think that almost all programs have anti stonewall opening books or knowledge after the Kramnik beating of Junior, but i think it is strange that Kramnik openly admits that he needs anti prog play in order to win and he avoids main lines because ^because to go for the main lines against the computer makes no sense at all – you simply forget something and the computer never does this at all. ^ Regards Jonas
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.