Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 10:21:20 05/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 23, 2005 at 11:06:56, chandler yergin wrote: >On May 22, 2005 at 18:04:27, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On May 22, 2005 at 17:36:27, Robert Hollay wrote: >> >>>On May 22, 2005 at 17:16:43, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>> >>>>On May 22, 2005 at 16:45:24, Robert Hollay wrote: >>>> >>>>[...] >>>>>If relatively weak players can draw against the top engines, why couldn't an IM >>>>>achieve always a draw against a GM? (using the so called "stonewall" technique) >>>>> >>>>>Robert >>>> >>>> >>>> Because a GM >>>> >>>> a) has a much greater chess knowledge >>>> in all phases of a game than an IM >>>> >>>> b) plays usually more precisely than >>>> an IM >>>> >>>> c) ... wins for some other reasons >>>> >>>> Kurt >>> >>>So a human can always prevent another human to play the so called "anti-chess"? >>>I asked this question only because it seemed to me that this "stonewall" defence >>>reduces the margin of knowledge between chess-players. >> >>You mean the margin of the differences in knowledge... yes, but the point is if >>a GM does know your tick for Stonewall, he will prepare for advantages. A >>Stonewall is NOT absolutely safe. > >When the center is blocked, play on the wing begins. > The stonewall is only good against Computers.. Actually it's May. Brings a lot of Sun. Bad for chess. ;)
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.