Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:33:41 08/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 2001 at 02:05:19, Mig Greengard wrote: >On August 25, 2001 at 00:55:56, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>But as you tell me there is something to learn, I believe you and I think this >>game deserves a longer analysis. > >You can't learn anything from 100 games unless you study each one. That's >Botvinnik, and it shows how hard it is for a human or program to improve. Many >games might not mean anything, but you have to look at all of them to find the >one that holds a golden nugget. > >DJ-Tiger was not interesting because of how easily Junior won, although that >draws attention, but when such a strong program plays into such a bad position >there must be something wrong somewhere. (Junior's b4 against Shredder was such >a move and will be giving Amir and Shay headaches. 17...f5 is yours.) > >17...f5?? (17...h5!) could reflect various misconceptions by Tiger. (below) As >always in computer chess, anything can be blamed on horizon, but that is wrong, >as you said. Obviously, if it had seen ahead another 10 moves it wouldn't have >played it... > >1) B versus N. Assuming white would play 18.fxe4??, "winning" bishop for knight. My gambitTiger expects Nh6 and I also read that tiger expected the right move Nh6 in the game. >2) King safety. Not valuing enough the fact that with the knight on h6 the black >king would be doomed in the long run. A human Master plays 18.Nh6 instinctively. I am not sure about it. The knight at h6 cannot move to another square without losing material so if black can survive the attack the knight may be trapped. I prefer Nh6 but I expect strong humans to think about it. Uri
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.