Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 17:47:01 03/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 27, 2002 at 17:05:26, Roy Eassa wrote: >On March 27, 2002 at 15:55:09, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On March 27, 2002 at 12:11:25, Roy Eassa wrote: >> >>>On March 27, 2002 at 12:06:25, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: >>> >>>>On March 26, 2002 at 17:33:03, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 26, 2002 at 17:21:42, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>GM Gulko is known not to loose too many games with white, he can keep up a >>>>>>rating of over 2700 even against Kasparov he has a winning record, but with the >>>>>>black pieces his record is below 2525. >>>>> >>>>>I wish they would run the contest again. I would like to see how much he has >>>>>learned from the first pass. >>>>He has learned nothing ;GMs play lousy chess compared to machines. >>> >>> >>>Maybe, but a grandmaster in his mid 50s managed to score 37.5% against top PC >>>programs in relatively fast games (winning against the "super" Shredder in the >>>process). I'd say mankind is still in the game! >> >>Quite Right! >> >>I'm afraid I may have not been so informative and kind in my response. >>It's annoying to read nonsense from trolls. Instead I may have replied, >>"You're a weak player who never learns, and is so blinded by purile emotion, >>that you can't assimilate the actual data that is sitting right before you, >>obvious to any reasonable person." >>"I just see sour grapes if your model the "Chess Universe" crumbles before you, >>only to find you're at it's lowest end of it's spectrum; not able to accept this >>you go and stomp in your corner, making alot of noise, nothing more!" >> >>I'm glad you repiled and not me Roy!;~) >>Terry >> >>P.S. Excellent analysis of Rxg7+!!, I didn't go through every line so >>meticulously! Very Good! >> >>Just deep enough to see White was mating, but I was tired!;) > > >Thanks for the analysis compliment, but you did yours in your head, right? >There's no way _I_ could do it without my trusty computer. Yes I did, and relatively quickly too, so my lines were not so complete, but a little better than Uri believes;~) Quite honestly when it comes to exact calculation, like in long mates which can be extended several moves computers often do cover a bit more territory than I do:) No shame in admitting that, afterall computations are the machines forte! Terry
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.