Author: José Carlos
Date: 09:24:58 09/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2002 at 11:15:30, Joachim Rang wrote: >On September 05, 2002 at 19:09:01, José Carlos wrote: > >>On September 05, 2002 at 18:20:00, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On September 05, 2002 at 18:01:03, Stuzzi Kadent wrote: >>> >>>>I do not play chess tournaments, but am aware of various time controls, and the >>>>perceived demand in the professional world (marketing, if not playing) for >>>>shorter time controls. >>>>I recognise it would be better to do away with adjournments because computers >>>>and databases deal with them too efficiently. >>> >>>I do not know about tournament with adjournments in the last years. >>>I remember tournaments with adjournments only many years ago. >>> >>>Unfortunately it seems to me that tournament with adjournment are hostory. >>> >>>I do not buy the excuse that people can use computers in the adjournment because >>>in the past they could also use advices of other players in the adjournment so >>>if today computers are reason to avoid adjournment then it means that humans >>>were a good reason to avoid adjournment in the past. >>> >>>Uri >> >> You got a point, but I disagree. I remember a Spain-ch (1994 I think). I was >>playing there but my results were quite bad. A friend of mine had an adjourned >>game against a very proud guy. My fiend was a pawn down in a rook ending. A >>frind of the other guy said "my friend's gonna win easily because I'm helping >>him analyze". So I took the bet and helped my friend. I didn't care standing >>awaken all night long because I had a bad tournament. >> So we did. >> At near 4am we found a very deep and interesting idea. We felt happy and kept >>analyzing. Later on we thoght it shold be drawn. I said "go to bed and sleep a >>couple of hours, I'll review the analysis. >> When he woke up, I told him everything seemed to be right, we reviewd all the >>lines and he went to play. I was crashing, but couldn't help watching the game. >>It was so exciting. >> There came a new adjournment, in a pawn ending. A pawn down, but most probably >>drawn. We went analyzing again. Draws everywhere. >> And again to play. Damn! the opponent had found something. It seemed he could >>win. I was dead tired and couldn't see a draw, but my friend thougth for half an >>hour and found a great idea. Final result: draw! >> I was sooo happy! >> Well, with computer analysis all of this is gone forever. That's very sad. >> >> José C. > > >On the contrary! With computers these analysis will go deeper and become more >interesting! Or do you think a computer can draw a rook- or pawnending (except >of 5-pieces of course) easily? I'm sure if someone only relies on the analyzes >of a computer for an endgame he'll get problems against opponents which analyses >with computer and (human) assistants. You're right in part. However, computers are the reason why adjournments don't exist anymore. That's the sad point. José C.
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.