Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 07:22:36 10/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 21, 2002 at 06:15:06, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On October 20, 2002 at 12:47:39, Bob Durrett wrote: > >> >> >>It seems that Kramnik was handicapped in numerous ways, all deriving from the >>fact that he is human. >> >>But his few days with the computer prior to the match didn't seem to have any >>bearing on the result at all. Other factors seemed to dominate. >> >>My perception. >> >>Bob D. > >Can't understand what you mean. Just take the first games and forget about the >final result then you'll get it. Why Kramnik should be handicapped at all? He >dominated Fritz totally! Hello Rolf. I was trying to characterize my "perceptions." Perhaps I did not do a good job of describing them. I was NOT trying to present logical or analytical justifications for my perceptions. Merely to describe them. You don't justify feelings and perceptions. They are just there and you usually don't know why. Kramnik was handicapped just because he had/has the misfortune of being human. His emotions, fatigue, ambitions, and many others all get in the way. Fritz is more fortunate. Fritz concentrates 100% on chess and nothing else. If humans were to do that they would play much better chess, I suspect. Kramnik did, indeed, dominate the first few games. But he did so in spite of his handicaps, not due to lack of them, IMHO. Perhaps he had additional distractions later in the match? Maybe simple fatigue? Maybe he lost his determination to win or his motivation? There is no way for us to know, although the game results are suggestive. I guess I was a bit disappointed by the latter part of the match. I had thought Kramnik was "less human" than he turned out to be. : ) : ) : ) : ) : ) : ) : ) : ) : ) : ) : )
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.