Author: Roger D Davis
Date: 18:25:53 05/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 21, 2005 at 19:38:21, Darrel Briley wrote: >On May 21, 2005 at 14:12:12, Roger D Davis wrote: > >>On May 21, 2005 at 12:43:33, Darrel Briley wrote: >> >>>On May 21, 2005 at 12:27:38, Evgeny Shu wrote: >>> >>>>anti chess is like the opposite of chess, >>>>but you actually ttry to win , so I would call it anti computer style :) >>>>That's how the technique called I believe >>> >>>No, from looking at the games, I don't think he tries to win >> >>If he wasn't trying to win, he couldly probably draw in fewer moves. > >Again, as I've already posted, if you consider doing nothing in the hope your >opponent will run out of time trying to win, then yes, he is trying to win. I think where we disagree is that he's "doing nothing." I think there's an intense amount of cognitive activity involved in keeping closely to an anticomputer strategy. You're still mini-maxing, but the lines you're choosing are lines that support your strategy, that maintain the blockade. To me, that's not doing nothing. If it was nothing, anyone could do it. 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.