Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 11:49:52 05/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 18, 2002 at 18:29:39, Russell Reagan wrote: >On May 18, 2002 at 15:44:39, Marc van Hal wrote: > >>If you postional understanding becomes better this works against everyone > >As my previous example clearly shows, this is not the case. Take a set of 10 >players. If you are the weakest player in the group, and you play the second >weakest player in the group, eventually using positional learning you will be >able to beat him, and you will become the second weakest player in the group. >Clearly he has learned positionally, but your statement that it "works against >everyone" is also clearly false. The worst two players could be rated under >1000, while the rest are grandmasters. His positional learning that took him >from rank #10 to rank #9 aren't going to mean squat against the grandmasters, so >it's not going to work against everyone. > >Russell Yes he will be more of a chalange against these grandmasters then he would be without his increased positional knowledge. Not to mention that his positional knowledge also will increase after playing against the stronger oponents. If you loose does not mean you did,nt learn anything. It is the other way around you only can learn from your losses Like Capablanca already knew to treasure them (Which he did with writting a book in which he used most of his lossed games.) An other example to clear things up In the time of Morphy the positional knowledge of the players was diferent from the players of the time of Lasker,Capablanca,Alekhine,Euwe,Botvinik And the positional knowledge of the players of the time of Smyslov,Spasky,Tal,Fischer was diferent from the time of Karpov,Kasparov Only because many players started to use the methodes of the leading players of their time. Wich shows you the methodes how people increased their positional knowledge trough time. You realy get the feeling the players lived in when looking at the games of the leading players of that time and their coments. Which mostly has to do with increased positional knowledge. Methodes of attack and more important methodes of defending. An other aspect where you don't hear to much about is the creativety of the games like in the time of Reti where some modern defenses came out of the nothing. Which actualy started from a disagreement on Nimzowich statements. Then after playing many games with an opening the path of these openings becomes more clear. Which sometimes can take a long time. In the book of Eduard Gufeld Winning with the Kings Indian Eduard noted the development of the b6 system in the Saemisch which actualy shows how openings lines are improved. This was also the reason why I started to analyse openings from zero. To find the optimised methodes of openingsplay. Or in short If the program has a realy way of improving it's positional understanding it is likely that it in time will beat the strongest grandmaster Because it will lead in a new time of positional understanding ! Regards Marc van Hal
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.