Author: Jarkko Pesonen
Date: 23:59:09 01/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2003 at 21:26:12, allan johnson wrote: >On January 30, 2003 at 20:50:37, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On January 30, 2003 at 20:28:37, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On January 30, 2003 at 19:57:34, stuart taylor wrote: >>> >>>>On January 30, 2003 at 19:48:10, Rodney Topor wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 30, 2003 at 19:43:51, Arshad Syed wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>After Game 1, I was very dissapointed about Junior. I didn't really think Junior >>>>>>would come back to win. Fantastic performance by DF. Hope to see one more such >>>>>>win, only without a Kasparov error. So far, all the games lost by DF and DJ have >>>>>>been mainly due to blunders on Kramnik's or Kasparov's part. Looking forward to >>>>>>see DJ break this trend. >>>>> >>>>>Do you meain to claim that all the games _won_ by DF and DJ have been mainly due >>>>>to blunders by Kramnik or Kasparov? Do others agree? >>>>> >>>>>Rodney >>>> >>>>I think that is most often the case. i.e. a clear proven blunder. But there >>>>might be better players against computers than Kasparov or Kramnik. >>>> It might well be that their extra few hundred ELO points don't make all that >>>>much difference against computers, compared to another person who is very >>>>special in anti-computer playing. Isn't Mr. Nemeth only about 2100 ELO, and >>>>maybe equal to Kasparov or Kramnik against computers? >>>>S.Taylor >>> >>>No >>> >>>I do not believe that Nemeth can score even 1.5/6 against Junior in the >>>condition that kasparov is playing. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>Nobody here seems to like logic. > >> Rolf Has anyone seen Eduard play the games he claims to have won?How do we know they weren't contrived? I think the fact that computers don't suffer nerves and are able to calculate extremely well make them difficult opponents. > Al >>Uri,how could youknow? How can you say conditions?Why should Eduard be in >>Kasparovs conditions?? >> >>And to the others above: You conclude that others are better than the actually >>best players.This is nonsense. These two are not the best for psychological >>reasons but for their deep insights. The point is this. They simply are not used >>to play compsand it also makes no sense for them. Money in such shows alone >>can't make them students again. Since both however are fantastic calculators too >>I make the only possible conclusion. They simply help theprogs to look good. >>Period. >> >>If you ask but why? then I say because they got million $$ for nothing. This is >>corrupting. >> >>Eduard would not be much better in front of a big crowd because he's used to. >> >> I have heard that Kasparov is NOT in front of a big crowd instead he is in a room with few people so he is not disturbed. >> >>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.