Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 17:25:15 02/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 2002 at 14:18:26, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: >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.) but this kingwalk was 2400 level, not 2700. loek is toying with the thing and still winning.
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.