Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 04:11:10 04/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 25, 2001 at 04:57:00, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >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. ^ I don't see why that is strange at all. Like in every other chess game, or so I presume, the objective is to maximize your advantages and avoid known disadvantages. In that light it would be considerable risk factor to play long and complicated variations based on memory. Mainly because comps are less susceptible to "read error" :-). The same is true of avoiding long calculations in positions with a lot of possible lines. In my opinion the term "Anti-computer play" is nonsenscial. If you have information about the opponent, you'll try to exploit it, whether it be a human or silicon opponent. Chess is an anti-opponent game. Regards, Mogens
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.