Author: Angrim
Date: 17:49:21 06/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 2004 at 18:26:02, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >On June 28, 2004 at 17:48:20, Angrim wrote: > >>On June 28, 2004 at 17:16:58, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >> >>>Perhaps as a chessplayer I have a bit of different perspective. I have played a >>>(very) little bit of bullet (1 0 usually). In bullet, the _only_ measure of who >>>is winning is kingsafety. Your goal is simply to get the king out in the open. >>>Then your opponent has lets say a 1/3 chance of a major game losing blunder each >>>move for 5-6 moves -> he loses. Positional play is worthless because the game >>>_will_ be decided by a tactic. That is why I don't like bullet. >>> >>>anthony >> >>This is only true when playing a human, and is irrelevant when talking >>about games between computers. Computers play only slightly different at >>1 0 than they do at 5 0, unlike humans for which it is a quite different >>game. >> >>Angrim > >Well, I think it is somewhat true for computers as well. If I have Zappa play a >game at bullet timecontrols, it _will_ hang a piece at some point. > >anthony Do we mean the same thing by "hang a piece" ? The meaning of this that I am used to is that you move into a position where a piece is unguarded and attacked, and that this move was not the best move available. If you lose a piece as the result of a 8 ply deep combination, I don't think that counts. Angrim
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.