Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 12:17:21 09/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2002 at 12:24:58, José Carlos wrote: >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. Is that the reason? I doubt it. I think adlournments don't exist anymore because it makes a tournament longer and for the publich less intresting (the public likes rapid chess, or at least the result on the same day).
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.