Author: Kurt Widmann
Date: 12:05:30 07/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2001 at 14:41:23, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 08, 2001 at 14:20:26, Kurt Widmann wrote: > >>Why is the importance of opening theory so neglected by computerchess >>enthusiasts? I am seeing the use of booklines sometimes totally ingnored >>by posters of rated computer games. It is my opinion, that booklines are >>the most important part of a chessgame. The quality of "Book",or the "Guiding >>human hand" for chessprograms has a greate influence as to the outcome of >>a game. Every good chessplayer trys to reach a familiar position or get his >>oponent into a unfamiliare position not suitable for his/her style of play. >>The recent performance of Pocket Fritz against GM's shows a tippical >>exploitation of ones opponent book weakness. If Kramnik can not find a hole >>in the armor of Deep Fritz, it is safe to assume that he will not win >>the match. Therfore I am shure that Kramnik is studying DF,s book over >>and over again,knowing the importance of once oponents strength and >>weaknesses, including the all important openinglines. >>Why then are so few discussion on any forum about current opening theory, >>as to their valididy and or exploitations of them? >>Just curious, >>Kurt Widmann > >I guess that kramnik is not going to know Deep Fritz's book before the match. >Chessbase has no reason to use the commercial book against Kramnik. > >Uri Well then, it is up to the "Book-kookers" to predetermine the outcome of the match to a great extent. And Kramnik better safeguard his prepared booklines. But Fritz usually plays only historical proofen lines,or will we see a surprise from its team. I do not belief that fritzes bookkookers will try to outbook Kramnik,except they hire Kasparov or Anand for this work. Kurt Widmann
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.