Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 08:37:18 07/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2001 at 07:36:33, Tanya Deborah wrote: >Also the same for a GM player. If we want to know if a GM is a real GM player, >or play at GM strenght we need to test him like a computer, in many kind of >positions ( open and closed positions) and compare results. GM can´t be test >like a computer. This is the point. If you have a GM that help you and play all >the time with you, (like a chess program) you will find that he also will be >weak in many kinds of positions. That is only true to a certain degree. Humans have the ability to forme a strategy when knowing the opponent. A lot of good players are capable of steering a game into a position that they understand. The anti-computer style, if such a thing exists, is a strategy against a computer program :-). Just like the Berlin system used by Kramnik was an anti-Kasparov strategy. They might both be boring, but they're allowed. So there's no such thing as a "normal" playing style IMO. Playing the opponent is a natural part of chess. >Example : GM Andres (2500 elo) played today like a 2000 player in a very known >position... It is very difficult to play always good, I mean in all kinds of >positions. Exactly. >I strongly believe that chess programs in fast machines are GM players. >and i am very happy for that! Maybe. >Of course, still there are many work to do about make better and better Computer >chess programs. That's probably very true. Mogens.
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.