Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:52:16 01/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 10, 2000 at 22:33:50, France Levesque wrote: >On January 10, 2000 at 21:25:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>for the moment, yes. Kasparov won't be #1 forever. Then the cycle has a >>chance to start fresh, maybe. > >Agreed, it would be nice to see Anand have a chance, he seems clean cut, normal >and a family man. Do you think it is actually possible to have a 100% sane >Chess Champion ?? Miracles happen ! > >Bob....who do you think will replace Kaspy GM ?? Sorry, but I hit the <submit> by accident... to continue. I could think of several: Certainly Anand or Kamsky are young enough that in 10-15 years they will be stronger than ever. They might easily overtake Kasparov then. Shirov might have a good chance today... especially noticing how Kasparov cleverly ducked playing him... There are probably others including Kramnik (perhaps). But today Kasparov seems to be pretty clearly the best there is. At chess anyway. Character-wise he leaves a bit to be desired of course. > >A few years ago my chess programs were beating me every single game, it was then >it dawned on me that chess programs will soon be the best players in the >world....so....what is the point of playing anymore ?! > >Then.... > >Somebody pointed out to me that a car will always beat a human being in a race, >does that mean we should no longer praise fast runners in sports ?? Of course >we should. I am glad we have FICS and Yahoo chess etc....it keeps the game >human. I find that computers have improved my game immensely and I am very >proud of what Chessbase has done, I don't care what anyone says, they are >overall # 1 and set the mark for the rest. > >One thing I find strange is WHY does Shredder keep winning or placing high in >the majors yet not so high on SSDF ?! It seems strange to me.....I wonder if >killer books could be the reasons ( I have no proof of killer books, it is just >a suggestion/possiblity ) I actually like my Shredder 2.0 program except there >is no analysis engine. Hard to say. It obviously plays well. It also gets very little respect. Sometimes opinion is stronger than results, for some. Very little can be done about that... > >I forwarded the HSU article yesterday by email to the Chess Federation of Canada >and suggested they publish it in En Passant, for historical purposes. I I think >it is an actual "chess artifact" which ends the DB-Kasparov feud and battle for >all time. > >In regard to FIDE; > >I think that it would be interesting to have a computer and human separate >tournament and then have the champions of each playoff. This would be very good >publicity. Let's face it the Khalifman match went basically unheard of in the >world papers, as compared to say Fischer/Spassky 1972. > It was really unimportant, IMHO. The politics of world chess and top level GM players is just outrageous. Probably the PCA was the worst thing that ever happened to chess. And the shennanigans in FIDE probably rank second. :) >Alright...I will get off my soap box now ! > >Take care, > >FranceL
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.