Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Kasparov is not a computer chess expert

Author: KarinsDad

Date: 13:56:37 05/05/99

Go up one level in this thread


On May 05, 1999 at 15:36:08, Prakash Das wrote:

>On May 05, 1999 at 12:37:01, KarinsDad wrote:
>

[snip]
>>
>>I think that it is a well documented fact that players do not always play for a
>>win. If you do not play for a win, are you not in a way, fixing the result of
>>the game? You are preventing yourself from winning. It is not a guaranteed draw,
>>but if you play for a draw, you are not playing for a win. At the GM and superGM
>>level, this type of thing happens all of the time. Miles and Reuben have the
>>record for the shortest game ever when they agreed to a draw without making a
>>move.
>>
>>When I sit down to play chess, I play for a win every time (of course at my
>>level of play, this rarely happens).
>>
>>When you resigned from the Colorado Closed, did you not improve the chances of
>>all of the other players. Hence, you partially fixed the results (you prevented
>>Michael from winning the tournament if nothing else).
>>
>>I guess it is a matter of degree. A fix implies a set result, but that result
>>does not have to be a win/loss, it could be a draw/draw.
>>
>>Something to think about.
>>
>>KarinsDad :)
>
> Agreed draws are a fact of tournament chess. At your level, you may play for a
>win, but your (most players) levels do not compare with high level chess. In
>this regard, Kasparov is not a great sinner. There are far worse sinners, and it
>behooves you to point them all out. Some of the worst among teh superGMs are in
>fact, Anand, and Kramnik. How many times have these guys drawn in interesting
>positions just when the game started. This way, Anand managed to stay in running
>for first place.
> Garry is a fighter, he likes to win. It's easy to take potshots at him because
>he is the best, always in the public eye etc. However I can go on about this,
>but it's hardly the place. If Garry had lost to Fritz you would be saying how
>bad his is. Judith got creamed, it's dismissed.

I was unaware that I mentioned any players in my post with the exceptions of
Miles, Reuben, and Ginat. I doubt I would ever comment on how bad Kasparov's
play is against a computer, no matter how he played (as you suggest). Where do
you get this idea from?

KarinsDad :)



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.