Author: Chris Carson
Date: 06:02:45 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 08:45:11, Chessfun wrote: >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. > >That's nonsense. >The same was said 5 or 6 years ago against Pentium 100's. >Yet these blitz games you are now looking at are the equal >of tournament controls on P100's. > >>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. > >Tell me please of the program that adapted to the strategy and how?. > >Sarah. Rebel Century, Chess Tiger, Deep Junior, Deep Fritz. Try it yourself at 40/2. If you can win 50% in a 10 game match, post the PGN's and I (and others) will verify. I have tried, but did not work for more than a game or two. I do not know how these programs adapt, but they did using learning or programming, you will need to ask the programmers, not me, I can only tell you how my program "Dallas" handles it, but the learning. 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.