Author: mike tubbs
Date: 16:36:55 07/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 12, 2004 at 19:13:33, Daniel Jackson wrote: >On July 12, 2004 at 19:03:41, mike tubbs wrote: > >>On July 12, 2004 at 18:45:12, Rafael Vasquez wrote: >> >>>Give he a week to work with the hardware+software to use. >>>If he gets to find a weakness, you can be sure he´ll beat them. >>> >>>He doesn´t PLAY better than the programs. >>> >>>His superior skill is to find WEAKNESS. >>> >>>He could play and lose a match, but when he finds a weakness he >>>will beat ridicoulsly the program. >>> >>>But althought he is not a better player(lets say GM), you can be sure he is >>>a strong chess player as well Master Level. >> >> Ok explained this way, it makes alot more sense, although i'm not sure I agree. >>Surely he can't find weakness better then kasparov and Kramnick who actually had >>the program for months before they played it, and still didn't manage to win the >>match. Also there is a big difference between a pent 600 and a 4 processor >>machine, don't you think that would make a big difference? > >Kasparov and Kramnik also played adventursome chess, with real risk, so that >really makes the difference. > >If they played very ugly anti-computer chess, the spectators would lose interest >very quickly. Well don't you think you have to play adventursome chess if your goal is to win against a computer? You can't play boring do nothing chess and expect a full point, only a draw.
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.