Author: Anson T J
Date: 16:58:43 02/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 05, 2003 at 17:49:25, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 05, 2003 at 17:43:56, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>On February 05, 2003 at 17:39:33, Russell Reagan wrote: >> >>>On February 05, 2003 at 17:27:27, Drexel,Michael wrote: >>> >>>>I dont think DJ knows that he is playing against Kasparov :) >>>>The sacrifice will be proven to be dubious. >>> >>>That has nothing to do with anything. >>> >>>There is a huge difference between theoretical dubiousness (of which you speak) >>>and practical dubiousness. Maybe in 10,000 years a computer will solve chess, >>>and we will be able to say, "1. e4 is a dubious move", and in 10,000 years, we >>>may be able to look at this game and say, "that was a dubious sacrifice". That >>>is theoretical dubiousness, and doesn't matter one bit here. >> >>1.e4 will certainly never proven to be dubious. > >What if it loses? What if it is the only initial move that loses and all others >win? Then it will be an obviously stupid move that only ignorant morons in the past played but not dubious :)
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.