Author: william penn
Date: 16:46:56 06/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 2001 at 19:30:08, Dann Corbit wrote: >On June 05, 2001 at 19:25:08, william penn wrote: > >>On June 05, 2001 at 18:55:02, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On June 05, 2001 at 18:06:21, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>On June 05, 2001 at 17:36:48, John Dahlem wrote: >>>>[snip] >>>>>Do you realize Hyatt has spent a large portion of his life in computer chess, >>>>>and is probably a good authority on these matters (better, even, than you)? I >>>>>believe he said around 2400 elo anyway, that is very strong, and not far at all >>>>>from GM. I think a 2400 elo player has good chances against GMs, especially if >>>>>they do not do anything to neutralize his great tactical ability. One problem >>>>>with computers is that just about any GM can beat them if they take the time to >>>>>study anti-computer techniques. >>>> >>>>I do not believe in it. >>>> >>>>Rebel beated a GM in a 6 game match so not >>>>every GM can beat them by anti-computer techniques. >>> >>>In that match, did the GM use anticomputer techniques or simply play whatever >>>style was natural? I have found that some GM's are unbelievably, profoundly >>>ignorant of anti-computer techniques (and others are very saavy to them). >> >> >> Dan this is Rediculous and you know it, I thought you were a smart man???? > >Shows how little you know. > >> how do you think Van der Wiel was undefeated against all computers until his >>match with Rebel???? So you think he used the anti computer strategy against all >>the other computers, but suddenly when he got to rebel he left his brain >>behind???? > >Happens all the time. Never had a bad day? > >>come on pal, your suppose to be a man of science this is rediculous. >>IT > >Actually, my specialty is grammar, capitalization, and punctuation. >That and the dreaded disease of certified public accountancy.
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.