Author: Roger D Davis
Date: 10:39:46 04/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2005 at 07:17:19, David H. McClain wrote: >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 Agree completely. Your logic seems self-evident. Roger
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.