Author: Madhavan
Date: 23:23:28 07/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 28, 2005 at 01:48:57, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On July 28, 2005 at 00:44:22, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > >>... frankly spoken: I am like many other people >>not at all interested in FRC (Chess960) and so >>we do not bother about implementation of FRC in >>chess programs. Can you imagine that FRC will >>ever become so popular like classical chess? >>I do not understand the big noise about this -:) >>Regards >>Kurt > > >Frankly Spoken: the more I play FRC the more >interested I become, since classical Chess is >only for those that have the time to study chess >openings for more than 3 hours a day. I remember >back when I stated to play in tournament, I realized >that only those that had the time available were the >one that really progressed at chess, since I like other >grown up who had a real job did NOT had the time available >to come back from work and study opening for three to four >hours daily. Now with FRC I can even challenge players that > are rated 200 rating points higher due to not having to memorize >openings. I just played 10 friendly games with a friend rated around >2100 by the USCF and he lost 6 games to me. He admitted that not knowing >what to do from the very opening was hard for him, and I reminded him that >that was the reason I I never progressed 10 years ago in chess. > >PS: I didn't tell him that I studied more than 10 books since I left from >playing in tournaments, but none were Openings books, Just strategies, tactics, >and endings. Your writing style here remind me of Naum's[engine] evaluations,the way how it evaluates? .. ... .... ..... ...... Which engines evaluates like the above? :-) >Jorge
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.