Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: bad anti-computer strategy ?!

Author: ALI MIRAFZALI

Date: 11:18:26 02/20/02

Go up one level in this thread


On February 20, 2002 at 13:14:12, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

>On February 19, 2002 at 20:19:59, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote:
>
>>On February 18, 2002 at 18:40:18, Frank Nelson wrote:
>>
>>>I tried fireside.anti-computer strategy and got buried by Hiarcs 7.32!
>>>I used f4-e3-d4-c3 formation only to watch Hiarcs open it up like a knife
>>>to a watermelon. I had a book once which said that studying the games of
>>>David Bronstein vs. computers was the right direction for anti-computers.
>>>I think that a person has to use his own common sense when playing against a
>>>computer. Computers don't get tired unless they are running on batteries
>>>and is usually good at forcing a desirable tactical variation. I think that most
>>>people play well when the opening is over then start to tire move-by-move and
>>>then blunder in a level position. The computer of course then take the
>>>initiative until it leads to a + - ! If anyone have some original anti-computer
>>>strategy please post to this CCC newsgroup. Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>>Ljubomir Nelson
>>Given the strength of current programs there is no such thing anymore.Rebel is
>>eating VanWely alive .Maybe this was true 10 years.If you are not a GM you
>>dont have a chance against a program
>
>Loek is eating rebel alive. he wanted to win first game a bit too soon
>and did a very dubious king walk.
>
>then he lost because he wanted to win. Rebel nowhere had real chances
>in both games till Loek blundered in game 1 somewhere near the end of
>the game.
Yes but if Human GM's did not make any mistakes ;they would be playing perfect
chess (which we know they do not.)



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.