Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 12:27:20 04/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2002 at 11:52:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 15, 2002 at 08:56:27, Jonas Cohonas wrote: > >>On April 15, 2002 at 08:17:04, Claudio A. Amorim wrote: >> >>>So, are these the programs supposed to play at a 2700 level? Sure, they win many >>>games against strong humans, but... Where is their chess competency? Shredder´s >>>errors against Smirin were so elementary that they would not fit well in a >>>strong club player´s blitz game. >> >>Let's not go crazy over ONE game! we need to ask these questions after the >>match, also you can not say "So, are these the programs supposed to play at a >>2700 level?" when this is a games based on one programs performance! >>Other than that i agree, it was not pretty... >> >>Regards >>Jonas > > >I think the thing that troubles _some_ of us greatly is this question: > >"Can you name any GM that would play a single game that looks as bad as > that one?" Yes, this is very easy. There are many such games if you care to look. But even if there weren't, all that would prove is that computers have DIFFERENT weaknesses to humans. I have some games in mind that might surprise you, I will try to hunt down these games for you. Those that immediately spring to mind are: Seirwan - Belyavsky, opening was exchange Slav, Seirawan looked very silly in this game and lost in under 25 moves because he seemed to ignore a k-side attack. Larsen - Spassky, Rest of World vs USSR, Belgrade 1970. Larsen played 1.b3, Spassky played O-O-O, h5-h4 etc and the game was a nice crush. Larsen - Korchnoi, similar game to the Spassky one. Reti opening i think, nice quick crush by Victor with an early h5-h4. Ah found the Larsen Spassky game, enjoy: (941) Larsen,B - Spassky,B [A01/06] Belgrade URS-World Belgrade (2), 1970 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.c4?! [3.e3] 3...Nf6 4.Nf3 e4 5.Nd4 Bc5! 6.Nxc6 dxc6 7.e3 Bf5 8.Qc2 Qe7 9.Be2 0-0-0 10.f4 Ng4! 11.g3 h5! 12.h3 h4! 13.hxg4 hxg3 14.Rg1 Rh1!! 15.Rxh1 g2 16.Rf1 Qh4+ 17.Kd1 gxf1Q+ 29/03/1970 World champions teach chess p.134 / The Golden Dozen p.84 /Best Chess Games 1970-1980 p.1 / Spassky's 100 Best Games p.221 [17...gxf1Q+ 18.Bxf1 Bxg4+ 19.Be2 (19.Kc1 Qe1+ 20.Qd1 Qxd1#) 19...Qh1#] 0-1 The notable thing here is that Larsen didn't lose because of the tactics, his position was already busted and there were various ways to win in the end. Instead, he lost because he just ignored the K-side attack ... very computer like! Actually, Larsen perhaps was a computer because he was noted for his poor sense of danger (the other game vs Korchnoi I refer too will illustrate this too). Despite this weakness, Larsen was undoubtably one of the world's top players. He played this game on *board 1* for the Rest of the World team, I think the very next day he turned the tables on Boris. Peter
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.