Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 14:35:24 12/09/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 09, 1999 at 04:28:20, Sune Larsson wrote: >On December 08, 1999 at 16:41:24, John Warfield wrote: > >> >> One of the Arguments used by those who advocate that Programs are not GM >>Strength is that Programs lose to 2200 players or less, whereas sopposedly GM's >>don't. I want to debunk this view by presenting this game played at the national >>open where six time U.S Champion Walter Browne gets crushed by a 2070!! Player. >>There are many other such games. Just where people are getting the ideal that >>grandmasters don't lose to lower rated players escapes me completely. > > Very interesting game! I will look closer at it in the evening. A bit busy at > the office right now. Colourful personality this Walter Shawn. Met with him > at a tourney way back in the 70th. Remember we had some good poker with the > Yugoslaves Janosevic and Damjanovic in the evenings, between the rounds. > Think Parma won that tournament. By the way, I see many talented persons > posting here. People that also say that they understand little about chess > and think they play badly. Can't really understand this, if of course you > have given chess some time. Think it's a matter of training. It´s not so > difficult to get a ELO of 2350. These people are not so strong. To become > a strong IM of 2450 you have to work much or have some talent. To become > an "ordinary" GM is more difficult - not to mention advancing to + 2600... > A nice way of learning the game is to play through lots of games. Just for > fun. See what happens and draw some conclusions of your own. Myself I do this > instead of reading alot of newspapers. Thousands of games through the years... > Then, when looking at a game, it's a matter of your eyes - to see and under- > stand what the position is all about. Then it's possible to understand why > in a certain position it´s "impossible" to play h3 - because you see and > feel that the tension in the center is what it's all about - or the importance > of quickly getting your knight to c5. Then you just can't think of moves like > h3. Talking to your pieces is good. "Hallo my little Knight on e2 - just > where would you like to go? Feeling good on this square? Aha, c5 nice "hole" > there - hm the way would be Ne2-c1-b3-c5... And what about my friend the > Bishop g2 just looking on the walls of pawns on e4, d5. And so on. > Nice game chess... > > Sune > > > This is just the kind of reasonning that take us to defeat against computers. Positional considerations about what to do "in general" but not -maybe- looking hard enough to tactic resources hidden in a combinaton between 5 or 10 moves. Once and again I lose games because I expend 95% of my time understanding the position and only 5% looking at what the bloody monster can muster against me. To become a 2300 player is not that easy as you say it is. You need that this 5% expended in tactical calculations be enough accuater and deep. There is where we -lesser players- fail. Problem is that computer does not forgive nothing of the sort. Esentialy chess is -for us- a tactic game where you lose or win on tactic terms. If you never got in yiuth an automatic almost unconciues tactical skill to avoid that, youl will not get it in adulthood. It always will be a non natral effort prone to mistakes at each step. At leas that is my experience. I know more but I commit the same number -or more- tactical mistakes. fernando > > > > > > > >> >> >>[Event "U.S Open"] >>[Site "U.s "] >>[Date "1999.12.08"] >>[Round "?"] >>[White "GM Walter Brown "] >>[Black "Lawrence Stevens "] >>[Result "0-1"] >>[WhiteElo "2500"] >>[BlackElo "2046"] >>[ECO "D20"] >> >>1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 e5 4. Nf3 Bb4+ 5. Bd2 Bxd2+ 6. Nbxd2 exd4 7. >>Bxc4 c5 8. Rc1 Nc6 9. Bb5 Nge7 10. Rxc5 Bg4 11. Qa4 O-O 12. O-O a6 13. >>Bxc6 Nxc6 14. Rd5 Qf6 15. Re1 Rfd8 16. Qa3 Be6 17. e5 Qe7 18. Rd6 Rd7 19. >>Ne4 Rad8 20. Qc5 Nxe5 21. Rxd7 Nxf3+ 22. gxf3 Qxd7 23. Qg5 Kf8 24. Nc5 >>Qe7 25. Qe5 Qd6 26. Nxe6+ Qxe6 27. Qxe6 fxe6 28. Rxe6 d3 29. Re1 d2 30. >>Rd1 Kf7 31. Kf1 Kf6 32. Ke2 Kf5 33. Rg1 d1=Q+ 34. Rxd1 Rxd1 35. Kxd1 Kf4 >>36. Ke2 h6 37. h3 g6 38. b3 h5 39. Ke1 Kxf3 40. Kf1 b5 41. Kg1 g5 42. Kf1 >>b4 43. Kg1 g4 44. hxg4 Kxg4 45. Kg2 Kf4 0-1
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.