Author: Mark Young
Date: 04:57:55 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 07:44:00, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On June 26, 2001 at 07:17:56, Mark Young wrote: > >>It is clear looking at the game, IM Matsuura was playing to keep the position >>closed against ChessTiger, but ChessTiger refuted this with 17...f5!. Opening >>the position and beating IM Matsuura(2467 Elo). > >In the Dutch champ several players tried anticomputer strategies. > >GM Van den Doel tried but he was not familiar enough with computers and >got toasted. > >GM Van den Doel - Fritz, 3e ronde NK 2000 >1.c4 Pf6 2.Pc3 e5 3.e4 Lc5 4.g3 O-O 5.Lg2 Pc6 6.Pge2 d6 7.d3 Pg4 >8.O-O f5 9.Pa4 Pxf2 10.Txf2 Lxf2+ 11.Kxf2 f4 >12.gxf4 exf4 13.Pg1 Dh4 14.Kf1 f3 15.Pxf3 Dxh2 0-1 > >GM Van Wely plays on the chess servers and is much more familiar with >computers: > >Van Wely - Fritz, 7e ronde NK 2000 >1.c4 e5 2.g3 Pf6 3.Lg2 Pc6 4.Pc3 Lb4 5.a3 Lxc3 6.bxc3 O-O 7.e4 a6 >8.a4 d6 9.d3 Lg4 10.f3 Ld7 11.Pe2 Dc8 12.h3 b6 13.f4 Le6 14.f5 Ld7 >15.g4 Pe8 16.Pg3 Dd8 17.g5 Lc8 18.h4 f6 19.Dh5 Pa5 20.Ta3 De7 >21.Pf1 Pc6 22.Pe3 Dd7 23.g6 h6 24.Pg4 Ta7 25.Tg1 1-0 > >It is not because one player tries an anticomputer strategy and >fails that the whole concept of anticomputer strategy is voided. No one said it is voided, people were saying the IM did not use anti-computer tactics, when he clearly did. The point being it is much harder to expoit the chess programs this way, then it used to be. The point is if something walkx, and quacks like a duck, it will most likely be a duck. And so far the computers are still quacking in strong human tournaments. Regardless of the statements made by some here. > >-- >GCP
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.