Author: David H. McClain
Date: 04:17:19 04/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2005 at 03:11:41, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >On April 21, 2005 at 23:09:08, Pablo Ignacio Restrepo wrote: > >>Hello Mike. >>The game is not the same. This is a diferent game. >>The general white strategic plan was the same. This was antichess style or >>technique. >>Best regards, >>Pablo Ignacio > > First of all: please avoid using capital letters. > And furthermore: your games confirm my assumption > that it is still possible (and sometimes very easy) > to get draw vs the top programs. Going for no risks, > avoiding any tension, exchanging pieces at the right > moment, under almost no circumstances play for a win, > using a do-nothing-but-do-it-well-strategy allows > even worse players like me (1950 Elo) to get draws. > Kurt Kurt, In all fairness to Pablo, hasn't he exploited a weakness with Hydra? Couldn't a GM who is good at anti-engine chess exploit this weakness further. If Hydra is so powerful and great, shouldn't its builders be fixing the inherent weakness Pablo has exploited and shown to everyone? While Pablo's methods are not always interesting or beautiful, why would one want to play into the strength of Hydra for the sake of a "good game" and surely lose. You never face an ememy on his terms. You determine the rules of engagement yourself if you can and I think Pablo is doing that, however unpopular and uncreative his methods may be. I'm sure Michael Adams is aware, or will be soon, of the weaknesses of Hydra and exploit them himself in June if he wants to. DHM
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.