Author: odell hall
Date: 13:39:07 11/21/99
If I win one in seven games against computers using blocked center strategies, and other such so-called anti-computer strategies can this realistically be called anti-computer play? I think it is a myth, and that there is no such thing as anti computer play. Not to say that computers don't still have obvious weakness, but that there is no clear defineable or stereotypical pattern that these weakness follow. Ten years ago , all computers demonstrated a obvious materialistic greed. I used to beat the radio shack 2150 by simply sacrificing a pawn for active piece play or an attack. Try such crude methods against modern programs and they will backfire. Judith polgar tried a similiar method against Fritz in their action match and got murdered. You have to laugh when you read some of the comments at Rgcc, where people pretend that the strategies of ten years ago, still work today. Yet when you challenge these people to ICC matches or ask them to produce some concrete examples of this "Anti-computer play some excuse is always give. If there was any real workable anti-computer play then fritz6 would not have won frankfurt, even if it was just action chess. Junior 5 would not have defeated Boris Gelfand at 60 0. Also if you look at the grandmaster challenge I don't think rebel lost any of it's games because of any Anti-computer play. IF I am wrong would some one point out a specific example? Oh by the way this is my opinion, I am not claiming this is a absolute fact.
This page took 0.01 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.