Author: martin fierz
Date: 18:02:38 05/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 14, 2002 at 19:34:29, Chris Carson wrote: >On May 14, 2002 at 19:26:17, martin fierz wrote: > >>On May 14, 2002 at 19:04:18, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>On May 14, 2002 at 18:56:05, Mogens Larsen wrote: >>> >>>>On May 14, 2002 at 17:39:32, Chris Carson wrote: >>>> >>>>>Very nice interview. My thanks to GM Smirin, he seemed to be very "open and >>>>>honest" with his assessment. I think all of his comments are very telling and >>>>>the programmers and our forum should take note. I found the follwoing points >>>>>very interesting (just fit my own interests): >>>>> >>>>>1. Computers seemed to avoid main lines. >>>>>2. Having White is very important against a computer. >>>>>3. Computers weak in closed positions and very strong in open positions. >>>>>4. He found himself tired, even with the breaks and shorter time controls. >>[snipped back in] >>>>>5. He would like a rematch. >> >>>> >>>>point 4 isn't correct according to the interview. Neither tired nor >>>>exhausted. That's your interpretation without any basis in the text. >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>>Mogens >>> >>>As usual Mogen, you are wrong: >>> >>>"Well, even though we played only four games per week, which helped me to pull >>>myself together between the games, it wasn’t so easy psychologically. As a >>>result, I lost concentration a few times during the match and it cost me at >>>least 0.5 point (and it could be even more if the computer was more accurate!)! >>>It’s just not so simple to play chess when you know that you have to avoid >>>certain kind of positions, even if your intuition is telling you it’s >>>objectively correct to go for them! However, I think I managed to withstand the >>>pressure, and at the moment I’m full of energy and not tired at all! >>>" >>> >>>A loss of concentration is "tired" or "exhausted", that is a psychological fact. >> >> >>read his lips please... and look at the games. >>"it was not easy psychologically" is given as reason for the loss of >>concentration. not tired or exhausted. this is not the same. >>if you look at the games, you will also understand what he means - e.g. the >>aborted game junior-smirin, where smirin had an easy draw as black, and was >>probably thinking along the lines "this is an easy draw and these comps are weak >>in the ending anyway, so why don't i just move back and forth a bit, nothing can >>happen here". he lost his concentration in this game not because he was tired, >>but because he underestimated junior. >>i know you have your agenda with this tired thing... don't let it influence you >>too much :-) > >I do not have an agenda, although it is clear that you and Mogens do. >I am a psychologist. I have a PhD in psychology. what has this got to do with it? > I specialize in "cognitive" and >"cognitive/behaviorism". A loss of concentration is due to being tired, >fatigued or exhausted or stress by definition. so stress (and i assume you mean a lot of things with that) is also an option - besides being tired. i tried to tell you that smirin simply lost interest in the game against junior. under what category does that fall? doesnt seem to be in there, but you can lose your concentration because of it. >I personally do not care if you do not agree with my "opinions" however this is >not just an opinion, but scientific fact. If you just wish to argue, I do not >not choose to argue with you. i do not just wish to argue. you have made statements on this board which amount to about this: longer time controls do not necessarily favor humans in human vs computer matches because the humans get tired. this goes against all data there is on this topic. there are facts on this, and you ignore them. >I get no compensation in any manner from this what has this got to do with it? > and I resent you >saying I have some "agenda", I have never accused you of any such thing except just a few lines above? >and I >deserver basic respect if you wish to communicate with me. basic principles of science are that you are allowed to contradict somebody who is making whatever kind of statements - right or wrong. anybody with a PhD should know this. i did not make this post to offend you. in your post, you read something into smirin's words that i believe is not there. and it just happens to fit into your pet theory. that's all there is to it. aloha martin
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.