Author: Harald Faber
Date: 00:25:58 05/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 15, 2002 at 07:29:12, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 15, 2002 at 01:41:49, Harald Faber wrote: > >>Again I do not get the point. You want to prove an opening line wrong by taking >>this BLITZ game into account??? >> >>Sometimes...it is really helpful to take a longer time control. For example in >>the line you posted above. On my slow (!) 600MHz Athlon Hiarcs has >> >>14...e5 with -0.62/9/41s, -0.37/10/1min06, +0.52/10/2min07 and changes to >>14...f7-f5 after 5min17 (0.00/10), stays there at 0.00/11/9min56 and plays that >>move at TOURNAMENT timce control after 11min10. >> >>I don't know whether this saves the day, but it is definitely of other quality >>than your g/5... I call it SHIT and not test. Such games have no value of >>anything concerning CHESS. > > >I disagree >chess is not only long time control and usually the better program in blitz is >also better at longer time controls. Give me proof. And BTW, I was speaking of s.th. else. >Hiarcs8 has good results also in blitz based on posts of other people and if >James walker does not get good results in blitz it may be productive to >investigate the reason. > >It may be problem in the opening book > >Note that James walker also got bad results at G/60. My point was not bad results in this message but to put in perspective that this opening line has a different quality if you just let the program think for 5sec or 5min. Therefore I disagree with your point. CHESS is only long time control. Imagine KNB<->K in human open, KNB has 2sec on the clock, K 1minute. Is this position won or draw? See the difference? For real CHESS the position is won for KNB, on the board, with 2sec on the clock, KNB will not mate within the 2sec so this is draw. You understand now? >Uri
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.