Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:41:33 12/30/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 30, 2005 at 12:22:56, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>On December 30, 2005 at 09:58:42, Mircea wrote:
>
>>On December 30, 2005 at 09:33:10, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>
>>>On December 30, 2005 at 09:16:53, Mathieu Pagé wrote:
>>>
>>>>On December 30, 2005 at 07:01:49, Ryan B. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On December 30, 2005 at 06:56:17, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On December 30, 2005 at 06:53:25, Ted Summers wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I can't hold it any more, "YES, YES, YES!!!". I am sure Rybka will win Paderborn
>>>>>>>2005! way to go Vasik Rajlich! Your program is a great piece of work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>well, it did play the best chess and deserve to win.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>it was lucky too as should have lost against Shredder and this one, but good
>>>>>>players are always lucky so...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>congratulations again!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sandro
>>>>>
>>>>>I agree, good and lucky.
>>>>
>>>>Last times I looked at the rules of chess there was no luck involved (Maybe you
>>>>are talking about the pairing).
>>>
>>>It is not Rybka fault if two opponents blundered in a winning position, but I
>>>would call this luck...do you have a better word?
>>>The games are there to be seen...
>>[Event "Buenos Aires WCh (27)"]
>>[Site "Buenos Aires WCh (27)"]
>>[Date "1927.??.??"]
>>[Round "?"]
>>[White "Capablanca Jose"]
>>[Black "Alekhine Alexander"]
>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>[ECO "D65"]
>>[Opening "QGD"]
>>[Variation "Orthodox, Rubinstein, 9.cxd5 exd5 10.Bd3 h6 11.Bh4"]
>>[TimeControl "40/1800:40/1800:40/1800"]
>>[Termination "normal"]
>>[PlyCount "76"]
>>[WhiteType "program"]
>>[BlackType "program"]
>>
>>1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 Be7 6.Nf3 O-O 7.Rc1 a6 8.cxd5 exd5
>>9.Bd3 c6 10.Qc2 h6 11.Bh4 Ne8 12.Bg3 Bd6 13.O-O Bxg3 14.hxg3 Nd6 15.Na4 Re8
>>16.Rfe1
>>Nf6 17.Ne5 Nfe4 18.Qb3 Be6 19.Nc5 Nxc5 20.dxc5 Nb5 21.a4 Nc7 22.Bb1 Bc8 23.Nf3
>>Ne6
>>24.e4 dxe4 25.Rxe4 Re7 26.Rce1 Bd7 27.Qc2 g6 28.Ba2 Qf8 29.Ne5 Qg7 30.Nxd7 Rxd7
>>31.Bxe6 fxe6 32.Rg4 Kh7 33.Rxe6 Rg8 34.Qe4 Rf7 35.f4 Qf8 36.Rgxg6 Qxc5+ 37.Kf1
>>Qc1+
>>38.Kf2?? {This was luck too, don't you think?} Qd2+ {} 1/2-1/2
>
>Yes, everytime the opponent blunder it is luck; the same for humans and
>computers...one can expect that to happen, but the opponent is not forced to do
>it...
>
>One cannot play weaker to expect the opponent will blunder...it is not a good
>strategy...
It depend on the case.
If you lose against correct play regardless of your choice than it may be better
not to play the move that lead to a slower loss but the move that gives your
opponent a chance to blunder and I also did it in the past and got a draw when I
am sure that in that case computer move was practically leading to a loss.
There are also cases when the stronger player may prefer to get inferior
position and not to draw by repetition and I know about a case when a player did
exactly that and won the 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.