Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 15:26:33 03/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2004 at 13:56:33, Dann Corbit wrote: >On March 17, 2004 at 08:07:54, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On March 17, 2004 at 04:29:15, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On March 17, 2004 at 03:59:16, Joachim Rang wrote: >>> >>>>On March 16, 2004 at 18:58:46, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>See this thread: >>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?354948 >>>> >>>>wait, wait... >>>> >>>>The continuation Rxf6 Qxf6 Re1 Qf5 Qxf5 gxf5 Bxd5 leads to a better endgame for >>>>white. If a GM tells me, that this endgame is won for white I believe him right >>>>away. >>> >>>I do not. >>>This is the mistake of trusting authority. >>> >>>GM got their rating because of games otb and not because of being better in >>>analysis with the help of computers. >>> >>>We have no evidence that they know better that somebody who analyzed the >>>position with computers. >>> >>>In case that I analyze the position for many hours(something that I did not do) >>>I believe that white is winning only if I see some wins against the engines in >>>this endgame. >>> >>>This endgame is also not forced and there are other lines that black can choose >>>that lead to a similiar endgames. >>> >>>Uri >> >>This let's me believe that even with a computer you'll never be able to conclude >>the same thing like a GM could in this position without computer. > >Uri has been a national correspondence chess champion. Israel is one of the >strongest nations for chess. If anyone knows what he is talking about as far as >computer analysis is concerned, certainly it is Uri Blass. >He does not always use the computer and also has good chess abilities as well. >Perhaps not as well as some OTB GM's, but good enough to be truly excellent. Just taking over consequently moves from a computer you have a higher correspondence rating than Uri has. National correspondence level is not so high. Not in Netherlands either. Only world cup and world wide invitational tournaments are pretty high level. Uri trivially failed there. A good example is that he concluded that 1 program was the best. This is of course not true. Program A is better in position X, program B is better in position Y. Uri concluded just 1 program to be the best for him. The reason for that is a simple one though. If you are not a good player you will take the average move when seeing 5 programs. A good player picks the best move however. The average move is of course worse than using 1 program continuesly, because you *at least* have the level of that program then. It's easy to understand why the average move is not giving the best game. Uri clearly has not understood this. So that's why i claim as i claim. I can't even mention the category where Uri belongs here at CCC without my posts getting removed. Note that i know some 1300 OTB rated players who are in the world top correspondence chess. They *are* capable of picking out the best moves from chessprograms and capable of in depth analysing something. As you will ask for names. Let me give one to you. Ron Langeveld. A very cool guy. I've been several times at his place. He has the most incredible analysis of his games. Uri is not even close to that level. Best regards, Vincent
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.