Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 16:40:28 10/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 20, 2002 at 19:23:32, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On October 20, 2002 at 16:06:33, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>On October 20, 2002 at 15:43:36, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >> >>>http://www.dailystarnews.com/200210/19/n2101904.htm#BODY12 >>> >>>In the above link I've found the following declaration: >>>"A member of the Kramnik team said Thursday, "After studying the computer's game >>>for over a year, it is almost as if we are being brainwashed by this programme." >>> >>>w.b.r. >>>Otello >>> >>> >>>p.s. >>>There is also "Even if I am playing for free, it is the same, I want to win. I >>>want to play good games. Winning is the most important thing to me," said >>>Kramnik. >> >>http://www.sundayherald.com/28623 >> >>After the finale, Kramnik said he had found Fritz 'much stronger' than programs >>he had played a year ago. 'It is not just strong in terms of calculations, which >>is to be expected, but in terms of positional moves. It plays like a very strong >>human. These are 'human moves'.' > >Excuse me if I add 3 points. > >1) The statement of Kramnik is simply absolutely wrong! Let me explain. Kramnik >is strong enough being capable of letting Fritz look good or bad. That is he lie >(yes, I will stay to that term) in his statement. The first 4 games have proved >that Kramnik could simply kill Fritz. The second half Kramnik played completely >different chess and Fritz looked "good". So simple as that. > >2) Why Kramnik played like he played and why did he talk like he talked? Look, >if you got 1 million or 800000 dollars for such 8 little exhibition games you >were simply incapable of being nasty to those who have made it possible that >you've won in the lottery. So you play your chess but then you realise that it >went too cruel, so you get it a bit slower. That is not cheating. That is >unconsciously what you would do yourself too if you were Kramnik. It's a certain >compassion for those chess amateurs from ChessBase. And all those average GM >around. Kramnik is a nice guy, he already said that he doesn't want to kill the >ego of the opponent. So what he did was simply being nice. And folks when did >you get 800 000 dollars for 8 chess games? That is so unreal and that was it >what Kramnik meant with the accurate site in Bahrain. It's like day-dreaming on >a sunny day in summer. > >3) That having said, let me point out what is ugly in such nonsense. It's the >depressing effect of such bought exhibitions on your art. Sometimes you could >see the genius play chess. But then to get it back to normal Kramnik played such >a nonsense that we began to shout "cheat" and "intentional blundering". But >Kramnik might have thought that people couldn't estimate his art anyway. >He might ask himself if that was justified to spend all these years away from >tournament chess and just in exhibitions. I think that that is the bad side of >the whole hype. In a way he sold his art to the devil to get the money. Honestly >I fear that Kramnik doesn't have the character to withstand the moneything. When >he was 17 he was drunken in Berlin where life is so different to his own >country. Now he has smelled the sweets of the money and it could well be that he >will never be the same he was before. He's neither Fischer nor Kasparov. And if >I had the choice I would prefer Fischer because he gave always full power and >his genius, while Kasparov is too much occupied with his own higher meaning in >the world. Kramnik will endlike Spassky. That is what I fear. > >But give me 1 million dollars and I say the opposite for a couple of days. :) > >Rolf Tueschen Thanks, Rolf, for the plain English. I understand you perfectly this time. But what is still unclear is how you could get all that from eight little games! Bob D.
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.