Author: odell hall
Date: 18:38:53 11/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 1999 at 20:41:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 21, 1999 at 16:39:07, odell hall wrote: > >> >> 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. > >Rather than making rash statements, log on with your favorite program and >challenge "cptnbluebear" on ICC, then report back as to whether this is a >myth or not. > >Seems like a poor bit of judgement to say "it doesn't exist because it doesn't >work for me..." Perhaps you just aren't strong enough. Ie if _you_ don't know >how to play 'blocked' positions then certainly it isn't going to work for you. > >"cptnbluebear" _knows_ how to play 'em... How many games does cptnbluebear win out of ten against crafty? 2? or 3? He never wins the match correct?? I rest my case. If this so called anti-computer strategy was effective he would win most of the games. Perhaps he wins some because he has learned the playing style of crafty. One can learn to defeat a human in the same way. I noticed even alexander morozovich lost to both crafty and ferret on icc, and he refuses to play them..... I wonder why??? I have heard you say yourself that if you only win one out of ten, then that is not really anti computer chess. Hell roman plays crafty 24 seven on icc. I am surprised he doesn't beat it the majority of the games. Every computer has it own unique playing style and weakness just like humans. You cannot take the weakness of say fritz, and then apply that knowledge in a game with rebel and defeat rebel. This is exactly why annand lost his match to rebel yet defeats fritz rather easily. If there was really a general anti computer strategy, Annand could apply the same technique that he defeats fritz and defeat rebel.
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.