Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 05:37:47 01/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 07, 2003 at 07:51:22, Mark Young wrote: >On January 07, 2003 at 06:33:17, Chris wrote: > >>On January 07, 2003 at 00:32:23, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>On January 06, 2003 at 14:15:00, Chris wrote: >>> >>>>On January 06, 2003 at 14:06:54, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 06, 2003 at 12:45:28, Chris wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Some people here seems to doubt that it is possible to beat the top engines, but >>>>>>I found out that you can still do it with the normal means of setting up the >>>>>>Stonewall as White. >>>>>> >>>>>>These games was of course played without takeback or other kinds of cheating. >>>>>> >>>>>>My OTB ELO is 2230 and I have studied computer weaknesses a lot. >>>>>> >>>>>>After this game, I lost six in a row, and I decided that maybe I need some more >>>>>>time the next time I challenge Fritz :-) I believe I would have a better chance >>>>>>at tournament speed. >>>>> >>>>>I believe that at tournament speed Fritz8 also can play better. >>>>>It is possible that it will not let you to win by the same strategy and the only >>>>>way to know is to try. >>>>> >>>>>It is a mistake to get a conclusion from speed chess about tournament time >>>>>control games. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>I believe Fritz would be stronger tactically in a longer game, but I don't think >>>>it would change so much strategically. I was getting into this position by >>>>following its book. >>> >>>It looks like Fritz blundered in a better position mostly due to a slow >>>computer. How do you win if Fritz plays 30.. Rg8. This would be played by Fritz >>>8 on a faster computer. >>> >>>I may be wrong, but I don't see were Fritz was strategically lost. Not until the >>>Blunder Rf7. >> >> >>The thing is that doesn't sense the dangers of the position which would be there >>even without Rf7 > >What kind of statement is that? A computer can never sense danger, it can only >see danger. With a slow computer and fast time control it did not see the >danger. With an up to date computer it would have and does. > >I disagree with your point, and I don't think you can show it to be true. > >That you were winning this game before the blunder. At a slower time control or >with a faster computer Fritz 8 would not have lost this game. I agree. on fast computers much more sophisticated methods are required to beat Fritz 8.
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.