Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 11:10:13 04/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 2004 at 13:49:15, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On April 19, 2004 at 13:33:01, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>It's losses are tactical losses only, not >>"positional losses" which is not how a 1300 player (or 1500 player) actually >>loses games... > >I'd think any game between <1900 ELO players is decided almost exclusively >on tactics. That may be true for the most part. Complex positions having much tactical content are likely to be confusing and the likelihood of playing the wrong move, tactically, goes up with the confusion factor. Closed positions can also be mystifying to the amateur because of lack of positional "sense." Most amateurs do know about elementary positional considerations but have trouble with obtaining and keeping an initiative. Attacks are usually handled poorly. Positions requiring positional sacrifice may be completely "above the heads" of amateurs. They also typically mishandle endgames. All of these things must be taken into account if it is desired to make a chess engine play like a human amateur [<1900 ELO]. I speak with the voice of authority about chess amateurs since I am one and have played many chess games other such amateurs. Bob D. > >Of course positional playing strength does matter, but it's not what >decides games, usually. > >-- >GCP
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.