Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:18:16 02/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2002 at 14:10:11, Derrick Ford wrote: >Excellent result for Century, but I think Van wely demonstrated that he is the >better player, game 1 should have been a Draw, Van wely demonstrated that he >could win as white at Will. Rebel Definitely played like a 2600 player however. I think it is a clear triumph for Rebel. What I mean is that under stringent conditions with a lot on the line, Rebel played nose to nose against a 2600 player and it was a standoff. Sure, van Wely lost due to time pressure. But that is simply an aspect of human play where the humans are at a disadvantage. What about the big strategic advantage humans have in making positional moves? Rebel can't cry about that, because that's just the way it is. Humans and computers play chess differently, with different strengths and weaknesses. I congratulate both parties. The Rebel team risked a lot, because they not only had to cough up a big chunk of cash, but could also have easily lost 4-0 (with the exact same program) and had people mistakenly conclude that Rebel was not ready for the big time against great players. Loek van Wely risked a great deal as well. These contests have a very large "John Henry/Paul Bunion" atmosphere about them and gather a very large amount of scrutiny because of it. I suspect that a very large amount of ego is at stake in a public match of this nature. It took a lot of guts for van Wely to accept the match. To both teams, I say "Well done!"
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.