Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 12:38:32 02/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2003 at 09:13:04, Amir Ban wrote: >On February 18, 2003 at 01:36:07, Bertil Eklund wrote: > >>On February 17, 2003 at 13:54:21, Rajen Gupta wrote: >> >>>"Boris Alterman dismissed a version that won big against a well-known SSDF star >>>as being based on nothing more than cheap tactics, and recommended a version >>>based on a match that it actually lost". >>> >> >>This is of course absolute nonsense and probably a pure lie. Of course it is >>only a way to say that it is weaker then the other top-engines and we hope to >>sell it on the merits of the Kasparov match. >> >>Bertil > >What makes you say that ? > >Amir Everyone knows that today it is impossible to beat a top-program with "nothing more than cheap tactics". In example Nimzo, Gandalf and Ruffian are tactically at the same level or better than Shredder but Shredders better positional play makes it a clearly better program. Of course you could be right if you mean that the matches was two, four or six games. I also believe you are wrong about your strange idea that Junior are positionally at the same level as Super-GMs. The interesting thing with Junior are that it plays sharp and many times strange moves that really can confuse humans. I also don´t understand the choice of openings in the match. In the first game b6 are a known loser against that variation, 9 to 1 in my computer gamebase. Black is already a move after and plays a non-move like b6. Next time with black you try the same idea, including castling right into the attack. Knight takes g4 was probably the right decision after the risky castling .If not Junior had been better in tactics than the white side in this game it should have been another loss. If Junior had been black against a known SSDF-star in that game it had lost. Bertil
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.