Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 07:21:09 01/07/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 07, 2006 at 08:36:28, Sune Larsson wrote: >Hi Rolf, > >you write that you were "totally surprised" by the fact that some information >about Rybka will be posted on Swedish chessforum - combined with a post here >where a German 1800 player built a fortress and got a draw from Rybka. > >This paradox is obviously beyond your frame of mind so you ask: > >"What is the meaning"? > > >Then you construct your own answer: > >"he comes here and wants to prove that - surprise surprise! - Rybka has certain >barriers in his perception." > > >So I will give you mine: > > > >1) I think Rybka deserves to be known among the OTB chess players. As a beta > she has shown extraordinary strength and a piece handeling + middlegame > that is worthy attention. She comes from "nowhere" and tops the lists > right away. The development is rapid. More knowledge is added. Crushing > match victory, with a Rybka book, vs Fritz 9 - game 90' - is news to > the tournament player. Therefore I will write about her in Swedish chess > forum. > > > >2) I share the surprise, joy and delight with Christoph Fieberg - rating > about 1800 - who found that he could turn a lost game into a draw, by > building a fortress in the game vs Rybka - and getting a draw. That > man was happy. At the same time an interesting position happened - that > could be looked upon by Vasik. Those are the reasons why I posted this game. > > > >3) Posting interesting games/positions where Rybka shows a wrong evaluation > could present interesting material to the author - and we all know that > Vasik participates actively on this computer chess forum. > > > > Chessgreetings > Sune Dear Sune, My Friend! I knew that your chess talents are outstanding - also the ones of you as a writer. As you know I am also very experienced and I for one know for instance things like the difference of the sum of the pieces and the whole. The whole is NOT as many think the same as just the sum of the single pieces. Here we have such a situation. You are extremely talented for the pieces (your paragraphes 1 to 3) while I am concerned about the whole. The whole here of what you are doing all together is simply not as high-classed as the single pieces 1 to 3. All your points taken seperately are ok. And that was it what surprised me. I could well add many more points, also your treating of Fernando. Here I have just this forth point. 4) You asked for material and even Sandro answered you with 31 games. But you just said that you would mention this package but you would prefer to take something with Fritz, because your readers in Sweden would know Fritz. That is an interesting technique. Not the quality of the Rybka games count but the score of Rybka against Fritz. This goes too far. I can see that you are well aware of "the whole" here namely the expectations of your readers in Sweden but you want NOT that they see what Rybka can do but what Rybka can do against Fritz. I must object that I didnt mean this Ganzheit when I nmentioned the whole because this is very close to manipulating the perception of your readers. Solution: just give them a good game against Fritz but then show them the highlights against who-cares. It's the chess that counts and NOT the fame of the opponents. Your approach reminds me of the foolish approach of the very talented chessplayer Gurevich who in cooperation with CSS, the German chessjournal created so-called World-Champion-Tests with ONLY positions from Wch players. Very foolish because tests require something else than names of the players of the games where the test positions have been found. So in my point 4) you intended a sort of brainwash for the Swedes what they didnt deserve to get IMO and I am certain that you will change it now. I thought you were busy now with your article for Sweden and _therefore_ just therefore, I thought that actually you would focus on that work. I did completely oversee that your talents are widespread so that you want to inform Vasik all the time about other aspects that have no importance in your article. But who could criticise you for your activities? I must apologise because I thought you were a little bit losing grip for your main oeuvre with all the distractions you find in messages for CCC. You see it's the old tendency to care for the wellness of the members that caused my slight corrections. Also I feared that you wanted to joke about Rybka in your big Sweden report. I didnt like that and told you why. I did so as a friend since among friends criticism is the highest possible service as you know. In the long run I could think that you are now an almost as-close friend of mine than Fernando. If you had not this tic against him. But this topic would make explode all the other good topics now and therefore I decided to completely leave it out of this message to a friend. Forever, Rolf - GENS UNA SUMUS
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.