Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 03:59:33 08/09/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 09, 1998 at 04:49:35, Amir Ban wrote: >On August 08, 1998 at 19:16:57, Mark Young wrote: > > >>Crafty Scored 7wins 2losses and 1 draw in the last 10 games played by IM >>Commons.(i guess the last 10) This is a player who knows how to beat chess >>computers, and I'm sure knows crafty as well as any player. And the games were >>play at fairly slow time control for ICC. I find it hard to understand why you >>think crafty is no better then 2400 at 40/2. I just can't see IM Commons playing >>that much better at 40/2 and crafty just falling apart. I think crafty would >>still win play IM Commons at 40/2. >> >> > >There's a huge difference between fast blitz and longer time controls. In blitz, >those humans who are not super-human calculators (some of them are), simply >don't have time to work things out, and it becomes a question if they are able >to get through the game without making an elementary tactical blunder. > >This is not what happens in long time-controls. I played quite a few tournament >games against masters (or above), and I remember only one game where the master >lost because of a simple tactical error (IM Alik Gershon). Masters are not >tactical weaklings, and they usually manage ok, even in complex situations. > >If you look through the games, you'll see what I mean. Game 2 is just a >mouse-slip (this only happens on ICC), in a won position. Game 4 is an >elementary blunder, and so on. Once you get to around 15 min/game, such idiocies >disappear, and it becomes more like chess. > >Amir Note that all of these games were played at 20 10 (20 minutes on the clock, 10 seconds added after each move.) But to call them "serious" is certainly a misnomer...
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.