Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 17:28:34 10/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 07, 2002 at 12:49:42, Roy Eassa wrote: >On October 07, 2002 at 12:28:07, Mike S. wrote: > >>On October 07, 2002 at 07:05:53, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>Mike, >>>and you want to imply that the marathon long surveillance of the Pa5 by the >>>Rook could be cured by some opening book tricks? >> >>No... this was in game #2, but my comment was for game #1 and when Fritz has the >>*white* pieces. I thought, (a) Kramnik's most solid defense is the Berlin, and >>therefore (b) to have the slightest chance to win White should not play the Ruy >>Lopez against him. >> >>(I don't expect that someone can really hope to surprise Kramnik with a novelty >>later in that variation.) >> >>Or IOW, we all want to see Fritz to go for a win with White I think, and that's >>not realistic when the book moves chosen allow Kramnik to play the Berlin >>Defense of the Ruy Lopez. >> >>It may be a good way to draw though, for psychological reasons (Kramnik >>satisfied with a draw too, with black), but I think for an event like that this >>is not an attractive idea. >> >>(We'll know more after the other white games of Fritz.) >> >>Regards, >>M.Scheidl > > >I thought Fritz did pretty darn well until that silly h4 move. It had realistic >winning chances up to that point (a clear pawn majority on the kingside whereas >the queenside was essentially equal). Admittedly, Kramnik is the best at >defending this sort of thing and would probably have drawn anyway, but IMHO >Fritz did well to achieve such a good position before blowing it with h4. There >are probably many other (esp. closed) openings in which Fritz would not have >such a good position after 23 moves. > >It's also entirely possible that a decade from now Kramnik's Berlin will have >long been smashed and this period of time (where it works for him) will be >looked back on as an anomaly. Programmers (not bob Hyatt fortunately) often dream of being real GM but when did you hear of a single novelty found by a computer??? The whole research is done by human GM, the only real GM. I wished programmers would prefer the hard way to success and not the ridiculous dreams of becoming master in a fortnight! Yesterday I read the question if a computer was already in INFORMATOR. I think that the question is relevant. Rolf Tueschen
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.