Author: Mark Young
Date: 05:15:03 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 08:12:01, Chris Carson wrote: >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? No. Game number 3. 2nd. win in a row now, the first game being a draw. > >Best Regards, >Chris Carson
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.