Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 09:22:32 03/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 07, 2002 at 12:07:24, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On March 07, 2002 at 12:00:31, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>I had the pleasure to have some serious talks about computers with Loek, he >>knows how to play the computer much more than I expected. Note his comment on >>12.Bg3? in game-2: I never would play such a move, but I knew the computer would >>take the bishop. > >If he knew anything about computers he would have known his game >setup in game 3 was a 100% sure zero. I can't remember i *ever* >drew a similar setup where i gave the thing options to either >win queen side AND attack my king. You kind of *force* them to >attack king side, which nowadays they all do. Loek van Wely went for the wellknown prophylaxis approach in game-3 and he has been quite successful against computers using this system. A matter of knowing your history. >Which in fact happened. With the known result. Ahem, I never have seen a 2700+ player being beaten by a king attack by a computer on 40/120. Can Diep find all Rebel's good moves of game-3? >Any person who knows something about computers is not forcing them >into a kings attack which is good. > >Loek obviously tried this setup the first time in his life, otherwise >he would not have chosen it. > >so the assumption he knows something about the thing is exaggerated. > >All he knows is that it is a machine. > >>During game-1 and game-3 he told me: "this is not the same version playing as >>you have send me". Imagine that! > >I bet he never installed Rebel Century, but only Rebel Tiger. I didn't >figure it out either until Jan Louwman told me Rebel Century was still >alive :) Again check your facts, Loek player over 100 games against Rebel as preparation on the match. Ed
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.