Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:50:40 06/14/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 2001 at 14:50:25, Dann Corbit wrote: >Why are some GM's unwilling to play anticomputer chess? These games are the >perfect example of how not to play a computer. Lots of open lanes, no >anti-computer methods employed. I disagree. The GM won a game with similiar style of play. The GM traded pieces in order to go for the endgame and it is one of the anti-computer ideas. Game 3: The GM lost because of blundering in the endgame and not because of blundering in the middle game. [D]8/4k2p/4pp2/r5P1/pR3P1P/P5K1/8/8 b - - 0 1 The GM had chances to draw but blundered by Kf7 instead of Ra7 and lost a pawn. Game 4: The GM had a relatively closed position but the position was not good for him [D]bb2r3/r5kp/2p3p1/p1Rp1p2/Pp1P1P2/1P2P1NB/5P1P/2R3K1 w - - 0 1 Every time humans lose against computers they are criticized for not playing anti-computer methods. I do not like it. If you criticize the GM for not playing anti-computer methods then it is better if you say which moves were practically not good against a computer(otherwise your words are not constructive) Uri
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.