Author: Chris Carson
Date: 05:12:01 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 07:17:56, Mark Young wrote: >[D]1rb1k1nr/2q1bppp/p1npp3/2p5/1pP1PB2/3P1NPP/PP2NPB1/R2Q1RK1 b > >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). Tactics (anti-computer) that work against programs at "blitz" time controls do not work against computers at longer time controls. This is a 2467 Elo player. I am sure he would no problem with most "2100" players even if he played them for the first time (his ELO would be 367 points greater). If this had been a loss for the program instead of a win, there would have been a few people touting, "Look, this is another example of the type of positon or strategy that makes a program look like a 2100 player, any 2100 player would know how to handle this". Trojan horse, stonewall, dutch, indian, KIA, KID, ... may be a good strategy (anti-computer), but at 40/2 programs are much stronger than 2100, the results show it, I have tried it with very limited success and the programs adapt quickly to the strategy. Is this the second game? Best Regards, Chris Carson
This page took 0.01 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.