Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: having to guess if computers are grandmasters

Author: blass uri

Date: 21:30:53 07/27/98

Go up one level in this thread



On July 26, 1998 at 18:42:16, Fernando Villegas wrote:

>Hi don:
>Yes, you are right. It is also a feature of this people to be extremely arrogant
>and self confident in an outrageous way to others. Not only the think of his
>positions as better than they are, but always the adversary is a piece of shit,
>a corny, old, stupid, worn out kind of guy. I suppose this is part of the
>psychics preparations to fight.
>And there is another reason to the unwillingness of GM to face computers: no
>matter the strenght they have, -computers- they are always dangerous in tactical
>terms and does not give room to mistakes so you cannot aply what you know of
>shock tactics, you cannot use tricks, you are not going to trash them by
>forceful moves

I can use tricks if the tricks are long enough.
even deeper blue did a tactical mistake in the match against kasparov in game
2 when it gave kasparov an opportunity to force a draw.

Uri
>and at the same time they benefits of any mistake you commit in
>that area. That very fact, to face an adversary that is perfect in an area, no
>matter how narrow the area, is tiresome. Have'n t you ever been defeated by a
>mere 1600 program because of that? I have been or I should have been without
>take backs tactical moves... For a GMI that expect to trash very fast at least
>some of the competence with just automatic use of tactical shots, a computer is
>a bloodu nuissance that does not give credit if you win, but harms a lot if you
>lose.
>Cheers
>Fernando



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.