Author: Vladimir Xern
Date: 20:13:59 12/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 21, 2005 at 19:08:59, Drexel,Michael wrote: >On December 21, 2005 at 12:47:14, Vladimir Xern wrote: > >>On December 21, 2005 at 11:36:22, Drexel,Michael wrote: >> >>>This game can hardly count as "orthodox" victory. >>>The win is solely based on very weak opening play by Rybka. >> >>Er, really? You mean to say that one side has to play worse than the other for >>it to lose? > >No, I mean to say exactly what I wrote. And what you wrote was an excuse for why my win "didn't count" so to speak. Read what you wrote again, then read what I wrote. :) >And here I thought that's how every chess game was decided. And that >>since Rybka played a particular part of the game worse and lost, it still >>"doesn't count" as a legitimate win? > >Why not. Be happy with your legitimate win. :) Thanks, but nothing to be too happy over apparently. >Rybka Beta is not what you can call a well-rounded program yet. It plays the >opening like a typical amateur engine (i.e. self-blockade of c-pawn or useless >Bishop checks on b4,b5) and has a serious lack of endgame knowledge. > >Well damn, I guess I'm back to the drawing >>board since winning apparently isn't good enough. >>>Any good book has 1.e4 e6 2.e5 d6. Try to beat Rybka from there... >> >>If Rybka played anything that thoughtful, I wouldn't have gone for the Steinitz >>variation in the first place, would I have? > >Getting the engine out of book on purpose at move two is Anti-Computer chess. >There is nothing wrong with it but 1.e4 e6 2.e5 Sc6 3.d4 Bb4+? is not something >you can call "orthodox line" by any means. Yes, but not "anti-chess" which all the pundits were screaming about. And I can't help it Rybka played unorthodoxly, can I? I guess you people won't be satisfied until someone outplays Rybka in some ultra-theoretical Najdorf, and if that's the case, you're too far gone to reason with. :) >>>Download the Man-Machine database from Tony Hedlunds site and search for a >>>machine who played 1...e6 in an important man-machine game. >>>You won't find many... >> >>Why? Oh, because you think the French is a poor defence for computers. Then you >>should be happy that I gave your claims some validity after all. :) > >>Facts: the game is an offhand, informal blitz game I played on a Wednesday >>morning while eating some breakfast cereal to provide a change of pace from >>anti-chess. All you armchair dissenters should lighten up on the arrogance. >>You're rated what, around 2300 FIDE? > >I wonder what my rating has to do with the subject. Read it again, it'll make sense. If German is your first language (and English second), I'd be happy to explain my reasoning more clearly. >You should be on our side expending a >>little elbow grease. :) > >>Oh, and Merry Christmas. > >Thanks, likewise > Thanks. -Vlad
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.