Author: stuart taylor
Date: 07:32:17 12/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 11, 2002 at 10:15:03, Bob Durrett wrote: >On December 11, 2002 at 05:55:31, stuart taylor wrote: > ><snip> > >>Isn't the stronger the program, the more you can learn from it, when losing? >>S.Taylor > >I don't believe there is a universal answer to that question. > >Someone who gets discouraged easily and soon quits will not learn much from a >program that slaughters him/her every game. > >A very strong chess player will be able to appreciate the subtleties. Such a >player should be able to learn a lot from thorough post-mortem analyses. >Incidentally, it is in the post-mortem analyses where I suspect most of the >learning takes place. It is there where one's "bubbles are burst." > >For someone like me, chess engines help me to purge out the gross blunders of my >game. All subtleties are "over my head." : ) All these things you say, I couldn't agree more. > >I find that what I desire is a chess-playing program that arrives at a good >answer quickly. It is a pain to wait for the engine to make up its mind. I >wish 3000 Kn/s chess computers were available today, at a price I could afford. >I sure could use one for my post-mortem analyses. Are you saying something IS available. I can't afford my own computer nor te programs of today, but if there were something very very special indeed, I would try to work out a way how to get it. (up to $1000 besides my computer itself, which I already have) S.Taylor > >A really fast chess computer would be especially nice for evaluating GM games. >In that case, a very strong chess engine is a must. > >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.