Author: Mark Young
Date: 21:27:40 10/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 23, 1998 at 00:14:15, Komputer Korner wrote: >On October 22, 1998 at 23:38:10, Komputer Korner wrote: > >>On October 21, 1998 at 19:20:01, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>I played my first game Vs. Rebel 10 today. I was very sad to find out it could >>>not win against my anti-computer play. So far:) >>> >>>Rebel 10 played on a P II 400 >>>Anti-GM set to smart. >>>EOC set to strong. >>>Level 30 sec./move >>>Rebel 10 book. >>> >>>I used 16 min for the game, Rebel 10, 27 min. >>> >>>[Event "Mark vs Rebel 10"] >>>[Site "Home"] >>>[Date "1998.10.21"] >>>[Round "1"] >>>[White "Mark Young"] >>>[Black "REBEL 10.0"] >>>[Result "1/2-1/2"] >>>[WhiteElo "1500"] >>>[BlackElo "2350"] >>>[ECO "A41"] >>> >>>1. d4 d6 2. c4 e5 3. e3 Nd7 4. Nc3 Ngf6 5. Nf3 Be7 6. Be2 O-O 7. O-O Re8 >>>8. Qc2 Bf8 9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. Rd1 Nxf3+ 11. Bxf3 Bg4 12. Bxg4 Nxg4 13. h3 >>>Ne5 14. b3 Be7 15. Nd5 Bh4 16. Bb2 c6 17. Nf4 Qe7 18. Qc3 a6 19. Nd3 Bf6 >>>20. Nxe5 Bxe5 21. Qc2 Rad8 22. Bxe5 dxe5 23. Rxd8 Rxd8 24. Rd1 Rxd1+ 25. >>>Qxd1 f6 26. Qd3 g6 27. Kf1 e4 28. Qd4 c5 29. Qd5+ Kh8 30. Ke2 h5 31. f3 >>>f5 32. f4 h4 33. Kf2 Kg7 34. Ke2 b6 35. Kf2 Qf6 36. Qd7+ Kh6 37. Qd2 b5 >>>38. Ke2 Qa1 39. Kf2 b4 40. Ke2 a5 41. Kf2 Qf6 42. Ke2 g5 43. fxg5+ Kxg5 >>>44. Kf1 Kh6 45. Kf2 Kg7 46. Qd7+ Kg6 47. Qd2 Kh6 48. Kg1 Qa1+ 49. Kh2 Qe5+ >>>50. Kg1 Qg3 51. Qf2 Kg5 52. Qxg3+ hxg3 53. Kf1 Kg6 54. Ke2 Kh5 55. Kd2 >>>Kg5 56. Ke2 Kg6 57. Kd2 Kh5 58. Ke2 Kg5 59. Kd2 Kh5 60. Ke2 Kg5 61. Kd2 >>>Kh5 1/2-1/2 >> >>There is nothing wrong in getting a draw with black. I would regard the fact >>that you did not win with white as the failing. Where do get off criticizing a >>program that does not win against you as black when you make no attempt to win >>as white? Even if you would draw Kasparov with a game like that, I would >>consider it no achievement. Give us a game where you win against Rebel 10 or at >>least draw with black. >>-- >>Komputer Korner > >Sorry for the preceding message. I am having a bad day. I just get angry at >players trying to play anti computer chess when they should be trying to play >their normal games. Computer chess is not for beating chess computer engines. It >is to help you play better chess and to give you enjoyment. However you are >misreading the meaning of anti-GM. Anti GM is about the engine selecting moves >that thwart the positional play of a very very strong player. It is not about >lessening the positional play of the engine to do this. Sometimes there just >aren't any ways to liven the position and thus a draw is the logical outcome. It >is yet to be proven whether ANTI-GM is hype or not but your one game doesn't >prove anything. By the way I once refused a repetition of position as white >against a player who was 700 points stronger than I was. I could have forced a >draw in an early middlegame position. I eventually lost the game. My reasoning >was that because I was white it was my duty to win. Chess players often get into >the habit of thinking that they have no chance against a much superior opponent. >Well he is only one opponent. Fight to the end and fear no man or machine. If >you don't have that attitude then you have already lost. >-- >komputer Korner No problem. I always put a new program thur its paces when I test it. Anti-computer play is something computer programs have to face. Even when playing titled players. So I test using it. I don't attack dog any program. And I did not think I did so here.
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.