Author: Mark Young
Date: 06:15:34 07/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 22, 1998 at 09:03:08, Howard Exner wrote:
>On July 22, 1998 at 08:42:20, Mark Young wrote:
>
>>On July 22, 1998 at 06:58:23, Howard Exner wrote:
>>
>>>On July 22, 1998 at 06:10:00, Amir Ban wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Can't find any information about what happened there except that Anand lost on
>>>>time.
>>>>
>>>>Isn't it very unusual to lose on time after only 28 moves when you are ahead ?
>>>>Seems to be an indication that Anand was psyched out.
>>>
>>>I'm starting to wonder if that aspect of the game we refer to as
>>>psychological may not be more of a factor in assessing overall chess strength.
>>>Computers seem to have the edge here. Many are the descriptions, his nerves gave
>>>out, he was psyched out (as in GK during and after game #2 vs DB2)
>>
>>You may have a good point here. Maybe the best Anti-gm tactic is to convince the
>>grandmaster he does not have a chance. If you can't do 200 billion NPS then tell
>>him you have anti-gm programming. I do not underestimate the power of a psych
>>out coupled with a strong playing computer program. The combo seems to be
>>deadly.
>
>You have also just reminded me of a funny and related story. IM Hergott
>wrote an article on his match against Hiarcs in our Canadian Chess magazine,
>"EN Passant". He said just before game three Al Tomalty (KK) came up to me and
>announced, "today I have put Hiarcs on aggressive mode". Dean Hergott
>replied something like he didn't own computer software and so had no clue what
>KK was talking about. But I wonder if that could have stuck in his memory
>as a Psychological distraction. Dean Hergott also said
>that because the games were played in a shopping mall kids were coming up to him
>and asking him during the game if they could have a turn on the computer.
>
>What would Korchnoi have made out of this?
>>
He would fall for it I think.
To beat Korch just tell him the computer also has a secret ESP brain scanning
device. The computer will beat him like a child.
>>
>> or
>>>he was so overwhelmed by the attack that his defense fell apart. Computers
>>>blissfully just go about their calculating. The flip side to this is that in
>>>their bliss they are unable to differentiate between a strong vs a weak
>>>opponent. So that computer quality of "strong nerves" may be best
>>>served when they are playing a strong opponent. And it could also explain
>>>why they lose or draw to weak opposition. Their play strength is extreme
>>>in that sense of being capable of defeating anyone and also of losing to
>>>anyone.
>>>
>>>>He preferred to let his
>>>>clock run out rather than risk a blunder. Didn't he at least offer a draw before
>>>>losing (the obvious thing to do in such a situation) ?
>>>>
>>>>I don't know in how much time pressure Anand was till this point, but seems he
>>>>played accurately. The game should continue something like:
>>>>
>>>>28... a5 29.b3 Qe8 30.Qg4 {better than 30.Rc1 b4 and white is in big trouble} f6
>>>>{or 30...Qf8 31.Rd1 Rxd1 32.Kxd1 Rd8+ 33.Ke1 f5} 31.Rc1 Rc6 32.Bxa5 Ra8 33.Nb4
>>>>Rxa5 34.Nxc6 Qxc6
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Amir
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.