Author: Terry Ripple
Date: 09:03:06 09/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 20, 2002 at 23:36:56, Matthew Hull wrote:
>On September 20, 2002 at 23:12:35, martin fierz wrote:
>
>>On September 20, 2002 at 18:44:59, Chris Carson wrote:
>>
>>>On September 20, 2002 at 16:52:46, martin fierz wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>it was an even result, but not an even match. there's a big difference, and as
>>>>long as you don't look at the games, you will never see it...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>I looked at the games and the results, however, what is your assessment?
>>
>>van wely self-destructed in game 1. to attempt to win an ending where you don't
>>really have winning chances and have very little time on your clock against a
>>computer is pure suicide (against a fellow human, why not - he is bound to make
>>mistakes too...). when you see a human do that kind of stuff, you know he is not
>>*really* prepared for a computer match, no matter how many training games he
>>played. i guess he never played really serious games, with time trouble and all,
>>else he would certainly have realized how dangerous this winning attempt was,
>>because he would have lost some of his training games in this manner.
>>
>>the other 3 games seem fair to me. if you ask me what i see in these 4 games, it
>>is that van wely should have won the match IF he had been in the right "frame of
>>mind" to play against a computer.
>>
>>you might say that van wely just blundered, as humans do, and that my argument
>>is wrong. but my argument is that van wely "blundered" long before his real
>>chess blunder by not taking an easy draw in the position with the 2B-Q by doing
>>nothing (i think he even declined a draw offer?!) - instead he went straight
>>into a situation which favors the machine: little time & tactics. and it's only
>>natural that he loses the game in this situation.
>>
>>my belief is that man-machine matches are all about who can force who to play on
>>his territory. which is IMO why white has had such a high winning %-age in
>>recent computer matches: van wely (100%! 4 games), gulko (75%! 8 games), smirin
>>(62.5% 8 games), same pattern in all, white is doing much better on average than
>>in "normal" computer-computer or human-human competition (i think about 55% is
>>normal). the extra tempo allows humans to play cautious setups as white, and
>>stay clear from tactics, while their attempts to do the same as black have been
>>unsuccessful to put it mildly :-)
>>
>>aloha
>> martin
>
>
>This is absolutely correct. It really is much easier to play anti-computer
>chess as white.
-------------------------
I would like to see if White could play anti-computer chess against the "Center
Counter"
if he would play P-K4! Example: 1.e4 d5 2.Nf6! (not Qxd5)as Nf6 leads to a more
tactical game!
Regards,
Terry
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.