Author: Chuck
Date: 14:50:16 05/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 24, 1999 at 17:21:54, blass uri wrote: > >On May 24, 1999 at 16:16:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 24, 1999 at 01:36:50, Mark Young wrote: >> > >>>Hiarcs7 thinks and shows it has a clear win playing the other programs and >>>against self play. I did not say Hiarcs7 is correct and this is proven. I want >>>people to punch holes in the move if they can. If I did not, I would just say >>>"White has a overwhelming position and black is lost at move 20". >>> >> >> >>I wouldn't call it 'pathetic'. IE why insult GM Rohde. He did win the game, >>and all your analysis has shown is that Hiarcs can beat other programs with Bg2, >>for example. > >The team of me and programs tried to win the computer with black after 26.Bg2 >without success. > >I also tried to see a line that leads to black's advantage against the computer >after 23.Rxb4 without success. > >I know that other in this club also tried without success. > >There is an evidence that 26.Bg2 is leading to a draw and that >23.Rxb4 is leading to white's advantage and I saw no evidence to the opposite. > >I want to know if it is possible to win hiarcs7 after 26.Bg2 or to do a draw >against hiarcs7 after 23.Rxb4. > >If nobody proves that it is possible then I believe that rebel missed a win by >23.Rxb4 and missed a draw by 26.Bg2 > >Uri I feel if the GM assessment of the position at the points in question is that White is lost, and us normal chessplayers with all of our computing assistance can't come to agreement with this assessment, then the most likely cause is we and our computers have a lot to learn; I would not automatically assume that the Grandmaster is wrong. Some people have blind faith in their computer programs. Chuck
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.