Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:41:23 11/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 22, 1999 at 18:26:53, James T. Walker wrote: >On November 22, 1999 at 12:41:31, Albert Silver wrote: > >>On November 22, 1999 at 10:18:14, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On November 22, 1999 at 08:39:22, Albert Silver wrote: >>> >>>>On November 21, 1999 at 17:22:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 21, 1999 at 15:55:32, blass uri wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 21, 1999 at 15:28:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>><snipped> >>>>>>>Not very exclusionary, except that I don't let it play 2 12 blitz. Because >>>>>>>that isn't blitz. Feel free to play it 10 12 standard of course. I try to >>>>>>>keep the three ratings separate: bullet=very fast, blitz=fast, standard=slow. >>>>>> >>>>>>If you try to do clear limits and you do not allow blitz that is close to be >>>>>>standard then you should not allow 3 0 blitz by the same logic because it is >>>>>>close to be bullet. >>>>>> >>>>>>Uri >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>If it wasn't for the GM players I wouldn't... But some insist on 3 0 time >>>>>controls, for reasons I'll never understand, because they run into a firestorm >>>>>at that time control... >>>> >>>>Egos are boundless.... >>>> >>>> Albert Silver >>> >>> >>>You guys still don't get it. SOME people play chess for the fun of it! >>>Jim Walker >> >>I play it for the blood, and that's the fun for me. The faster the time control >>and the tougher the competition, the more adrenaline is involved, and 3 0 >>against Crafty has to be tough. I don't think GMs take on Crafty at 3 0 time >>controls just for the fun of it, at least not in the light-hearted sense of the >>word. >> >> Albert Silver > >Hello Albert, >It's the same thing! If you love to sweat over a move at 3/0 then for you it's >fun to work hard at winning in the face of formidable odds. That's what I >meant. It does not mean the people who play 3/0 are not trying their best to >win. It's just that that's the way they like it! It's in your face -think fast >chess and it's fun! >Jim Walker I'm not sure I agree. IE I played a lot of tennis in college, and loved to play the very best players I could find so that the games would have some sort of challenge to them. But I would _not_ walk onto a court where the opponent was a robot capable of returning 200mph+ shots. There would simply be no point as no human could react quickly enough to hit the ball. In 3 0 chess, it is nearly the same problem, although some humans can definitely play with computers at 3 0 although they will lose more than they win most of the time.
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.