Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 18:11:43 02/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2002 at 14:27:05, Frank Wolf wrote: >I watched this game and have the following observations: > > 1] This is an experienced GM who was not born yesterday had should have an >excellent feel for when to draw and when to play on. Any Expert could see that >barring a blunder on Rebel's part (What chance is there of that?), Van Wely's >had no winning chances at all, and considerable chances of screwing up against >this strong program which is what happened in the game. observation 1 is refuted by Loek's next way of redenation: "this thing sucks ass. it's good for nothing. i can win against it with my last pawn if needed. If i keep my king on g7 i have a dead draw. i want to win from the stupid thing, let's go march with my king to its pawn, it probably won't see it, then my passers win against it. It's insane stupid this program to march with its king to my king side where it can do nothing. if i do the same perhaps it will go with its king to h7 and i win". 99.09% of the world population doesn't understand the DESIRE to WIN from Loek and many other players. Remember, world top is even spit at if you are number 17 because only number 1 spot is good. The 'i want to win' mentality is deep penetrated into society, society even supports it bigtime. Everyone except number 1 sucks ass is the mentality. As a result of that some have a huge desire to win. Reality is no part of that desire. I have it myself sometimes too. Without it i would be rated 200 points higher for sure, and with me another load of players. Remember another thing. A world top player. There are just a few guys above him from which majority he can draw easily if he wants to. If he plays someone whose name he didn't hear from yet, then this guy is at least 250 points lower rated than he is. In short he has to win from anyone or anything he doesn't know. He doesn't know Rebel, he is supposed to win from it. Same is true for all other programs. This winning desire has nothing to do with Rebel. If he plays fritz it is just the same desire and the same arguments. He wants to win *whatever*. > 2] What is Van Wely's motive for playing this match? Is he playing >differently than he would (aside from having a computer opponent)if he were >playing in a regular match with a strong GM? You look the most naive person in the world right now asking this question. Van Wely is a professional player. Chess is his work and his ambition to play. He plays for money of course. > 3] What are we REALLY watching in this match? I hope it is a strong GM >using his BEST SKILLS AND JUDGMENT to get the best score possible against this >strong program? The first game does is not consistent with this hypothesis. It makes the match at least exciting. if he would sit behind the board like a cool frog waiting for the thing to go strategically wrong then it is a very boring 4-0 for Loek or any other 2600+ player. Of course he would never use his best skills and judgement. Remember with 2312 i can already kick the thing by doing nothing. I play for a draw then if it goes wrong i kill it. Loek can handle 20 of my guys simultaneously. That's no joke dude. Those 380 points he is above me are 380 PROFESSIONAL points. it's not like me playing 1930 rated players. Kasparov recently beated GM team after GM team in simultaneously exhibitions. he 2830 or something and the GMs ranging 2450 to nearly 2600. That's only 230 points difference. Guess who won most games, the gm teams or kasparov? Obviously if Loek would play optimally, so OPTIMALLY to beat the computer, then the thing could go home. Preparement at opponents is so important, that it can be shown as next. Kasparov went for a game in the israeli competition. He faced a 2550 guy who had perfectly prepared for him. Kasparov could be happy to take a draw in that game. He was dead lost. Normally spoken kasparov *never ever* draws or loses to a 2550 GM. Not in the biggest dream of a 2550 GM. EXCEPT if such a guy is very well prepared for a certain openings line and against the player he plays. this shows something how important preparement is. In a random position world top like Van Wely is unbeatable to a lower rated guy who is not near world top. Only very good preparing for an opponent can change the odds sometimes. Obviously no GM ever prepares to play a computer. My tip to Van Wely to beat Rebel would have been: "get an endgame". Rebel is a great program, it has strong points and it has weak points. One of its weak points is endgame obviously. Loek doesn't know this. Obviously he at most could mistake Tiger for Rebel. I'm sure loek doesn't even know how to get rebel to work on his win XP laptop. Best regards, Vincent
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.