Author: allan johnson
Date: 16:09:00 07/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 1999 at 18:33:43, Mark Young wrote: >On July 13, 1999 at 12:58:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 13, 1999 at 12:06:39, dfan wrote: >> >>> >>>On July 13, 1999 at 11:57:17, Kristo Miettinen wrote: >>> >>>>Does anyone have any ideas on how to use computers to objectively assess the >>>>strength of human GM's based on the games of past tournaments? >>> >>>There's an interesting chapter in "John Nunn's Chess Puzzle Book" in which >>>he used Fritz to blundercheck the games of a tournament from early this >>>century (maybe 1920's, I don't remember exactly). He came to the conclusion >>>that play was overall much weaker in those days. >>> >>>Dan >> >> >>The problem is, he didn't check current tournaments. I see lots of outright >>mistakes today as well, in GM games. GMs aren't infallible. The only question >>is, does the mistake change the outcome, or just the number of moves in the >>game? > >I agree, and it depends on who you are looking at in the past. Morphy made few >mistakes in tactics that I can find with computer programs, and most of them are >just shorter mates. > >It must be understood in some eras of the past it was fashionable to play only >"attacking chess", it was not perfect chess in the sense of today more rounded >style, but the goal then was to crush the other player with a smart and maybe >unsound sac. Yes I seem to recall Tal saying several years ago that his sacs were less successful in the 90s than the 50s and 60s because the players of the 90s were more conscious of the need to defend better. Allan
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.