Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:08:59 09/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 16, 2003 at 17:12:59, Joe McCarro wrote: >On September 15, 2003 at 19:56:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 15, 2003 at 18:56:30, Mike Byrne wrote: >> >>>On September 15, 2003 at 09:11:25, emerson tan wrote: >>> >>>>I played a 24 game match between Shredder 6.02 and Hiarcs 7.32 with the >>>>following opening. >>>> >>>>1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6 7.N1f3 h6 8.Nxe6 >>>> >>snip< > >>There is another question: "did Kasparov try this and like the result when >>computers played Nxe6 against him during his training?" >> >>IE he obviously had some pre-computed traps ready for Deep Junior in the last >>match, with his g-pawn stuff. Do you think he thought that move was (a) >>strategically best against all opponents including human GMs; or (b) that >>move was strategically best against computers? I'm pretty sure it was the >>latter. >> >>That begs the question about h6. Did he (a) make a silly mistake? (b) not >>expect Nxe6 as a response; > >As I recall from an interview after the game he did not think a computer woudl >play this move. He said he thought the computer would play a Panov-Botvinnik >attack. I think he thought that after h6 any other move is poor for white and >the computer won't play Nxe6. IMO He was tired and took this gamble. > > > > or (c) feel happy with Nxe6 or any other white move >>in that position, knowing the opponent was a computer? >> >>I think any of those are plausible, but I think (a) is the least plausible of >>the batch, knowing how he prepares and his memory ability. I've done this >>_very_ sort of thing against computers in the past. One favorite was a line >>against the Super Const. (we often used it in our chess club when we had a >>tournament with an odd number of players). I played openings that I would never >>play against humans, but which I knew led to wins against the computer, >>specifically the Supercon. >> >>Of course, had I planned such an opening against the Supercon and then sprang >>it on Cray Blitz, I would have known what was going to happen immediately. But >>it seems that Kasparov had very bad advice about the comparison of the 1997 >>Fritz program vs the 1997 DB2 machine that nobody knew much of anything about, >>other than "it was big and fast..." > >I too think he did not think Nxe6 would be played based on the other computers >he played in 1997. However I think knowledge abotu compeuter play based on >software available in 1997 helped him achieve some comfortable positions against >DerB and win Game 1. Yep, but it is very dangerous to enter untreaded water with an unknown opponent. IE DB might be tactically weak, tactically equal, or tactically much stronger than Fritz (which Kasparov used for practice). Not knowing, and letting others tell him "DB is no better than Fritz when you give Fritz lots of time to search" was a horrible mistake to make. Sort of like entering into a quick-draw contest and only then discovering that you just paired off against Wyatt Earp for the final match...
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.