Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Test Your Positional Play

Author: Roy Eassa

Date: 09:43:42 09/04/01

Go up one level in this thread


On September 04, 2001 at 02:03:37, Robin Smith wrote:

>On September 04, 2001 at 01:51:12, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On September 04, 2001 at 01:45:37, Robin Smith wrote:
>>
>>>On September 03, 2001 at 19:26:41, Jeroen van Dorp wrote:
>>>
>>>>>I'm not trying to get you in trouble or give you a hard time, but is this a
>>>>>common way of playing correspondence chess?  Do the opponents know that they are
>>>>>playing againt a computer?  Do they care?
>>>>
>>>>This subject has come up before, and it seems most correspondence competitions
>>>>have surrendered to using computers.
>>>>
>>>>Each should have fun like they want to, but -
>>>>It must be boring to death - beating your opponents because your computer
>>>>calculates longer.
>>>>
>>>>But hey, if you like computer correspondence chess - it might be fun.
>>>>I hope that there will stay some places around where you still won't find an
>>>>opponent with a pc, but just a human brain. If it's lost, I'm sure going to miss
>>>>it.
>>>>
>>>>J.
>>>
>>>There is a LOT more to top level correspondence chess than running some program
>>>longer than the other guy.  People who rely solely on computers in
>>>correspondence chess are often refered to in correspondence chess circles as
>>>"postmen", because they deliver the mail for their computers.  I LOVE to play
>>>against postmen.   They are generally easy targets.
>>>
>>>Robin Smith
>>
>>I believe that still using more time is productive.
>>Note that I do not play always the move of the same program
>>and there are even rare cases when I do not play a move of the programs but with
>>the same method with less computer time I believe that my result could be worse.
>>
>>Uri
>
>Hi Uri,
>
>I wasn't talking about what you do.  You clearly use human judgement, otherwise
>how can you decided which program to believe?  And of course I agree, if you are
>doing anything with a computer, more time is better than less time.
>
>But people who blindly follow computer advice are often easy pickings for me.
>

I have never played correspondence chess, but if I did, and if it was clear that
is was perfectly OK to use computers for help, I think I'd take this apporach:
I'd study the position without any computers for a significant length of time,
pick my top move choice and a couple of alternatives, then use the computer to
tactically "debug" my choice(s) and also to tell me if I'd missed a MUCH better
tactical move.  Unless it had a clear tactical win that I hadn't seen without
its help, I would not let it pick a move for me -- then I would feel like I
wasn't really playing the game myself.  However, I can imagine real value in
using it to find tactical errors in the lines I've chosen, so I can then reject
a given move and try my next-favorite selection.



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.