Author: Robin Smith
Date: 08:26:31 05/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 2004 at 08:48:11, Mike Taylor wrote: >On May 27, 2004 at 22:55:06, Robin Smith wrote: > >>On May 27, 2004 at 15:09:29, Mike Taylor wrote: >> >>>Kingside attacks use to be an effective weapon against computer chess programs, >>>but that issue has been correct in the top programs. >> >>It is much better than in the past, no doubt, but it is also certainly not >>completely corrected. >> >>>Would u please provide an >>>example of a game u have played against a recently released top chess program ? >> >>Although I use computer programs extensively for analysis, I don't play against >>them. > >Well, if you do not play against, making the argument that you know the ways to >beat them, seems to put your book in the 'meaningless' category. > >My theory on beating computer chess is as follows: > >1) Know the opening better than the opening book author; > >2) Forget about trying to out play the computer in the endgame, with Nalimov it >is impossible; and > >3) Long range strategy will work, forget tactics computers are to strong now. > >And if I did, without the aid of a top program to assist me I make far too >>many tactical oversights and I would lose almost all the time. > >Yup, join the club -:) > >>I could give you examples of postal games where I am pretty sure my opponent was >>in fact just a recently released program, but in these cases I was also using >>silicon assistance. I just try to do it more creatively and effectively than >>most. > >Everyone that plays postal chess uses computers, that is what computer chess is >suppose to be about "Perfect Chess". > >> >>Robin > >Robin no offence but after what you have just stated I think your book is >another "How To Improve Your Chess" book, rather than "How To Defeat The Silicon >Monster" book. > >Cordially
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.