Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 07:23:30 10/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2002 at 08:01:19, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >[Since I write from abroad I must use the AOL account, so please do not >speculate! Thanks.] > >I've read quite a few statements about the 5th game, whether it should have been >"fixed" or not and even Bob took part with the sophisticated differentiation >that blunder or not, we had to realise the point that an opponent had do >"notice" presence of the blunder after all... > >That is all completely uninteresting! > >Perhaps it could help the debate about fixed or not-fixed if I give here a quote >from Kramnik himself and then the "experts" here have new food to think. > >1. (Quotes by heart) "I checked the coming endgame after the loss of the pawn b7 >and saw no solution for me, then I thought I could simply exchange the Knights, >but immediately I saw that I would then lose a piece!" > >2. "So then I went back to the endgame, but couldn't look through to a safe >draw. Then I came back to the exchange idea and made the move (Qc4)." > >Here not the exact wording is important but only the process of decision finding >in 4 steps. Kramnik said it this way on the press conference. > > >From these rather strange explanations I wrote some kind of brutal, because >reveiling, analysis about the situation Kramnik is in after the report of Eric >Schiller, who proved Kramnik wrong with his statement that Fritz had been >qualified in a "tournament" before etc. Now it must be clear for Kramnik that >he's just the tool for a PR action for ChessBase. I compared his "blunder" with >the 6th game in 1997 when Kasparov should have confused the move h6 in the >opening. Insiders knew then and know by now that GM like Kasparov and Kramnik >the two best GM actually, would never make such mistakes. Your assumption comes from history in human competition where the psychological factors are completely different. See below. >So such "blunders" are >more a way to express revulsion and contempt. Bobby Fischer always prefered to >leave or at least to not to play. But the modern way is just more sophisticated. Bobby Fischer "left" and "not played" becuase he was chicken, pure and simple. All his whining and complaining and accusations were just defense mechanisms to hide his cowardice. Kasparov and Kramnik, whatever their failings, are not cowards like Fischer. They play chess. They take the risks and play the tough games. I submit to you that more blunders are committed against computers becuase the psychology is so different. The machine has it's own psychological advantage in that the human player knows the computer can't make a mental slip like a human. The psychological dynamic is completely different. All your old assumptions about super-GM consistency are invalid in this situation. >Because it's telling the smart insiders... > >In my 11th mosaic I wrote about "Realitätsverlust" (loss of reality) and in >Smarttalk I explained the alleged "blunder by Kramnik". There is the correct >German wording from the press conference. Both articles in German unfortunately. >If I have the time I will add a little translation later on. > >http://hometown.aol.de/rolftueschen/11.html >http://hometown.aol.de/rolftueschen/SmallTalk.html > >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.