Author: Mark Young
Date: 02:39:58 07/27/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 27, 1998 at 05:24:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 26, 1998 at 22:45:33, Mark Young wrote: > >>> >>You may be right. I am just torn on this because of what I think I know and what >>I saw. I expected the computer to get rolled like Fritz 5 did. Instead I saw the >>computer match blow for blow with one of the strongest players in the history of >>the game. And this was not at game 30, but at 40 moves in 2 hours. Maybe GM >>Anand was just a bit off, Or the computer was lucky and got into positions it >>could understand well. I am not saying for sure Rebel 10 is of Grandmaster >>strength, but I am thinking hard about it. But I'm sure what I saw was better >>then 2400. > > >the thing that most stands out to me, when comparing anand-fritz and anand- >rebel is the play by Anand. Against fritz, he did *not* let the games get >wild and open. Against Rebel, he went so far as to castle opposite. I thought >he would lose the first long game as a result, because he didn't have to go into >that type of position. > >So there was a difference in the two matches, but I believe that the difference >was more on the part of Anand, rather than the two different computer programs. >Rebel can't make Anand castle opposite. Fritz couldn't prevent it. > >Wish we knew more about why he adopted a more open and "normal" style of play >against Rebel, while simply strangling Fritz... Maybe Ed has given us the answer. I joke about it, but maybe Anand thought the Anti-Anand thing was real. So he thought the best was to counter it was to play normal.
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.