Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 16:42:04 01/31/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 31, 2003 at 09:56:57, Bob Durrett wrote: >On January 31, 2003 at 07:26:15, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On January 31, 2003 at 05:42:14, Drexel,Michael wrote: >> >>>On January 31, 2003 at 05:21:32, Drexel,Michael wrote: >>> >>>>On January 31, 2003 at 05:01:20, Francesco Di Tolla wrote: >>>> >>>>>Kasparov once told that chess is 100% tactics. >>>>> >>>>>Well saying that after Rxg7 in game 3 white is better because he has the >>>>>initiative is not a tactical reasoning and Deep Junior has shown to us that >>>>>sometimes, supported by pure calculations, one can enter in a position like that >>>> >>>>white is not much better after Rxg7. 15.Bxh6? was already a mistake. >>>>if this move would have made by a 2300 patzer like I am. Understandable >>>> >>>>In fact this move was played by Garry Kasparov (2847). Very disappointing. >>>>Kasparov should have played 14.Bxe4 Kh8 15.Bxh6 gxh6 16.Bxc6 Rb8 17.0-0-0 with >>>>big advantage for white. >> >>You're correct, 14.Bxh6 wasn't the best, and 14.Bxe4 was the best move. The >>above line is much better. >> >>Also 15.Rxg7+? was a mistake! It removed a pair of rooks, and my stomach turned >>when Kasparov played this move! >> >>Better was 15.Bxg7!...Ng4! 16.hxg4...Kxg7 with an advantage for White. Although >>not an all out win. But far stronger than trading a pair of Rooks! >> >>So this was error two! Of course I gave up all hope after the blunder 32.Rh5?? >>as Nxd4!! was curtains! >> >>In total no less than three mistakes and one outright blunder! >> >>I can't understand myself why Kasparov made these type of mistakes, he should >>know better periord! >> >>He didn't toss the position, he's incapable of doing that, but a 2800+ player he >>wasn't, yesterday! >> >>It was my most painful four hours of chess I've sat and watched through to the >>end:( > >Perhaps the most painful part of this is the recognition that such faulty play >is the "curse" of being human. Such play is the nature of human chess. > >On the other hand, the computer made it's mistakes too! How to explain that? > >Bob D. > Computers calculate but don't understand, and that is why they "jump" into a tactical fight, even unsoundly, if it's "deep" enough. Human's just make mistakes, no matter how brilliant they may be! >> >>I hope Kasparov returns to sound, sane chess in Round Four..... >> >>Regards, >> Terry >> >> >>> >>>OK. I have to admit. there are some complicated lines after 14...Nxe4 15.Bxh6 >>>Bf5. white should come out on top but this is not an easy position against a >>>Computer. It was told on Chessbase Server that Deep Junior would have played >>>14...Kh8 with clear advantage for white in my opinion. >>> >>>> >>>>>on the board after Nh6. This looks like a position that only a "human patzer" >>>>>would play, and still DJ held it against Kasparov. >>>>> >>>>>The lesson is that we can continue to use positional evaluations as a >>>>>shortcoming to actual calculations, as any GM does in his "pattern-matching" >>>>>scan of each position on the board. But computers can do better with 100% >>>>>tactics. >> >>That wasn't the problem, Kasparov miscalculated, see above. >> >>Regards, >> Terry >>>>> >>>>>What I like of this match is that Kapsarov is playing almost as he does in >>>>>trounaments, I hope he will not switch stile after this defeat. >>>>> >>>>>Actually I think that an anticomputer strategy is still possible, as the games >>>>>by some minor player show, based on extreme-long term planning, but will work >>>>>only sometimes, and other times you'll be the victim of your long term planning. >>>>> >>>>>bye >>>>>Franz
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.