Author: martin fierz
Date: 20:05:08 02/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 2002 at 17:15:39, Tanya Deborah wrote: >On February 20, 2002 at 03:49:39, martin fierz wrote: > >>On February 20, 2002 at 00:53:37, Tanya Deborah wrote: >> >>>Bah!, Why is so difficult to believe for many persons that today programs play >>>not at GM level ????????????? >>>Congratulations to Ed, for this great beguin... >> >>did you see that it was van wely who was playing the cool moves? there was a lot >>of talk about Qh4!? of rebel. but how about van wely's exchange sacrifice, which >>he had to forsee when he castled? and did you not notice that van wely declined >>a draw offer, gambled to play for a win in a position where he could have had a >>draw anytime, and lost? >>why is it that so many people judge playing strength by result and not by what >>is happening in the game? answer: they don't understand what happens. yes, rebel >>won the game, but *only* because van wely is a gambler - not a good idea against >>computers... >> > > >you are right martin, but people said the same about Miguel Thal. He won great >games, when the position was really inferior for him. The most important thing >is go for the win. If you examine a lot of grand Master games, all these games >had mistakes. In chess is so dificult to play without mistakes. tanya! it was loek who was going for the win in this game, not century!! he had an absolutely safe draw in the 2B-Q endgame, but *chose* to gamble and lost. besides, after taking a look at game 2, who says rebel is grandmaster, eh? :-) aloha martin
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.