Author: Uri Blass
Date: 00:30:19 06/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2005 at 03:15:51, Mark Ryan wrote: >On June 15, 2005 at 02:38:07, Madhavan wrote: > >>Excuse me,what exactly is the difference between a 2000 rated player with >>computer assistance and a 2600 with the same program running as the first >>one?since we are sure both of them were probably going to make all computer >>moves > >The grandmaster will only use the computer to blundercheck his ideas for >tactical oversights. This is a big mistake to do it. If the 2600 player use computer in that way then I guess that kasparov has good chances to beat it. I think that it is better to do the opposite. Give the computer to play and use your brain to blunder check the computer in order not to play the computer move in case that the computer makes a blunder and to analyze more in case that the computer makes a blunder. In many cases, he will ignore the computer's evaluation, >especially in quiet positions. > >Moreover, even two 1000-rated players will not make the same moves as each other >even if they are using the same software. This is because the computer will >often evaluate several different variations as being identical in strength, or >nearly identical. Thus different players will make different moves based on >their personal preferences, choosing from equally-rated options. You assume that they use the computer with more than one option. It is a mistake to do it for weak players because the computer is slower with 2 options. It is better if they do all computer moves. I said that experienced 2000 players can use their brain to correct the computer moves in some cases but 1000 is too low(maybe they can understand fortress positions better(I even doubt it because they may be wrong to think that a position is fortress when it is not a fortress) but fortress almost never happen in game. Uri
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.