Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:25:38 09/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 03, 2001 at 18:59:29, Christian Kongsted wrote: >Dear Uri, > >For me it is interesting to hear about your correspondance play because I have >been playing correspondance chess myself. I dont see what satisfaction you can >get out of only picking one of the computer programs moves - dont you want to >use your own creativity? I analyze also other moves but only in rare cases I choose a move that none of my program suggested. I did it only 3 times in all the championship against 3 different opponents I did it against Dov rozenberg and Luba kristol in order to win faster(I believe that the computer move was also enough to win) These games are still not over because the opponents did not resign but if there is not something that both I and my programs missed they have no chance. I did it also against IM pinhas azar and it was not a good decision. I think that in that case playing the computer move was better. I found that Deep Fritz could not win against itself after the computer move and I wanted to win that game but the computer move was still better and in the game azar got a better position(I drew that game). > >Sometimes when I have been playing correspondance chess, I can feel that I am >playing against a computer program. It is not that difficult to spot, it is not >very interesting either, and my opinion is that the players that trust their >computers to much wont get very far against good, positional (human) players. It was enough for me to beat GM har aven(2585 ICCF rating) It was also enough for me to beat IM pinhas azar in the previous stage(at this stage I got only a draw). I can add that I believe that in 98% of the positions there is at least one program that can find the right move. > >I am very impressed by the new Junior 7, which I consider the best program >commercially available, but this program also has problems sometimes, f.ex. to >hit the right plan in a closed Kings Indian/closed French (or positions like >that), and endings that require not only calculation, but also planning and >understanding. Tactically, it is simply amazing, I have to admit that... > >My impression is that the strongest players are those that use their own >intuition to find the right moves, and after that - check his analysis with a >program. I do not believe it. I believe that using computers only to check blunders is a common mistake and humans simply underestimating the computers. They are not good only in tactics and they can give you after a long search a good positional move. > >If correspondance chess is only a matter of picking which program that is >playing, and who lets the computer think the most time, then I think the idea is >dead (sorry). But I dont think it is - yet. I did not say that it is only picking the right program but humans should be vary careful about using their brain and playing a move that was not suggested by the programs should be done only if you are almost sure that all the programs are wrong. 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.