Author: Johan de Koning
Date: 17:45:05 10/23/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 22, 2003 at 13:43:25, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On October 21, 2003 at 01:48:53, Johan de Koning wrote: > >>On October 20, 2003 at 05:00:44, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>On October 19, 2003 at 08:05:25, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>> >>>>the problem was the book. >>>>it's not a big problem. >>>>jeroen was unable to eliminate the line because rebel >>>>came LATER in this line. >>>>The king played the line maybe by luck or by chance. >>> >>>Smells like home cooking to me. :-) >> >>Please refrain from adding smart comments to half-read threads, >>unless it is *really* funny. >> >>It will only increase the noise level of already complicated discussions. >>And it will certainly increase the irritation level of the involvees. >> >>No offence taken. >>No offence intended (well, frankly, a little bit). >> >>... Johan > >Actually, no offence was intended. Perhaps a little was taken, though? Just a bit irritated. The issue has been discussed more then enough (about 3 x enough :-). The fact that Thorsten and Uri have a hard time letting go is no reason to restart at square 1, but rather the opposite. IMHO of course. >As it happens, I disagree with those who think that preparing variations in >advance of a game to spring on an opponent is unethical. Since there is now way to rule it out (assuming fixed strarting position), the only option is to consider it part of the game. It is however an awful lot of work, if you desire a nett positive effect. >I will be >presenting a paper at the ACG conference. I am confident this will give you >ample opportunity to demonstrate just what a newb I am. ;-) I'll try, as soon as I grasp the concept of ordinal correlation. :-) ... Johan
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.