Author: Robin Smith
Date: 13:49:28 06/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 2005 at 16:29:01, Christopher Conkie wrote: >My point is that from the 13th move onward up to and including 16.....Na5 he did >not appear to play like Michael Adams. In what way? What should he have played in order to play like Michael Adams; _specifically_ what should he have done differently? >I would have thought that he would have >known about the game between Anand and Leko. 1) What makes you think he doesn't know about Anand and Leko? He played the same moves as Leko until _Hydra_ played differently. It sounds to me like he does know about Anand-Leko (and that probably is why he played into the position, since Leko won). >It is a very dangerous position for white. I think he (Adams) was spooked a >little. He went all strange allowing c4. That is what I find weird. How could he have prevented c4? If anything Na5 was an attempt to prevent c4, since it controls that square. Any other move would allow either c4 or other ways of opening the position. It was going to open up regardless. >He is much better than that. He made one mistake and his game collapsed. It happens. Other super GM's have made _gross_ blunders against computers while Adams did not, yet people are piling on all over him. That is what I find strange. -Robin
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.