Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 17:39:32 12/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 19, 2002 at 13:15:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 19, 2002 at 12:43:31, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On December 19, 2002 at 11:12:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 19, 2002 at 07:59:40, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On December 19, 2002 at 00:21:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 18, 2002 at 22:55:44, Russell Reagan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 18, 2002 at 22:45:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>It is going to be a queen-odds game most every time, otherwise you have to make >>>>>>>_sure_ you never leave your queen open to a two-mover. IE I play Ne6 and don't >>>>>>>let you play dxe6 in this case and instantly play Nxd8 and the game is basically >>>>>>>over. There are lots of such "plans" to deal with. I think a double move once >>>>>>>in a game is enough to offset at _least_ a 500 point rating difference. >>>>>> >>>>>>It sounds like you are assuming that your opponent won't know (or will >>>>>>momentarilly forget) about this added double move rule. IE your opponent isn't >>>>>>going to let you play Ne6, and then say, "oh, I completely forgot about the >>>>>>double move rule." He would probably prevent you from playing Ne6 in the first >>>>>>place, since he would have calculated ahead and known that if you get to play >>>>>>Ne6, he loses his queen. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>What I am saying is that it adds an impossible dimension to the game. You have >>>>>to make moves that allow _no_ two-move tricks. IE two-move checkmates, or >>>>>two-move tricks to win big material, or promote a pawn, or whatever... >>>>> >>>>>>I think it's a big advantage, but I think if you played 100 games between two >>>>>>computer opponents, both of which were knowledgable about the double move >>>>>>possibility, it wouldn't turn out 100-0, but I may be underestimating the >>>>>>advantage. >>>>> >>>>>You should try it. I used to play several variants on this theme at chess >>>>>club meetings. For example "may I". It is a terrible advantage. >>>> >>>> >>>>Bob, I think that actually the GM could (if they wished, but of course they >>>>don't in a PR show for million dollars) almost 'zugzwang' a DEEP FRITZ. Feist >>>>was really believing that his high selectivity could bring advantages because >>>>the depth should be deep enough. But I am saying that good GM would find out the >>>>solution what the machine had "forgotten" to analyse. And therefore such >>>>nonsense is overall spoken good, for the majoritya of players, amateurs of >>>>course, but the best players have the killer instinct to find out the exceptions >>>>of the game. >>>> >>>>Rolf Tueschen >>> >>> >>>Yes, but here is where you are wrong: >>> >>>You are talking about a particular _implementation_ of an idea (null-move search >>>as implented in Fritz.) An "implementation" can be bad, while the original idea >>>is good. I can think of automobiles that fit this category. :) >>> >>>But don't confuse "theoretical idea" with "practical implementation". >> >>1) I'm ready now for the last secrets. Please tell me all about it. How do you >>make sure that Kramnik can't find the holes in your selectivity. > >No way I know of. But the holes might not be so obvious, and they may take >quite a while to expose and understand. The match might be over by then. :) > > >> >>2) I found it absolutely unfair when you had ice the last time in NY or >>elsewhere and they showed a VW slipping and sliding on the ice without clear >>direction. I think the VW was one of very few cars who were still functioning >>while Ford and all that still took a break in the garage! Admit it! > >Not here. I have a Dodge pickup and ice rarely stops me, so I can't say >much else. Although clearly "off-topic," I feel obliged to second that motion. In December of 1963, we had 17 inches of snow here. My big 1957 Chrysler car, with it's really big tires, drove over that snow like it was dry pavement. A friend drove his beloved VW, and his passengers had to get out and push MANY times just to travel a few miles. : ) But I do like European optics. Even the Japanese optics make the USA commercial optics look sick. And, just to get this "on-topic," I guess Fritz is still at the top. Bob D. > > > > >> >>3) Made in Germany is still World Class. You can also see it in computer chess. >>;) > >What is made in Germany today? IE the Mercedes? Got a Mercedes plant 40 >miles from my house, the only site where the M-class is built. > > > > >> >>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.