On Apr 9, 2:37 am, Sanny <softta...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > Here is a link to the correct game:
>
> >http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM18202&game=Chess
>
> So you used Computers help in that Game.
No. What I did in that game was attempt to
simulate a real QN-odds game between the
GetClub program and a top commercial chess
engine. I did not interfere except in three ways:
1. I decided the setting for the program's
contempt factor.
2. I invented the moves by which the program
would "hang" its Queen's Knight.
3. I decided when to play the move displayed,
the cut-off time.
There is a BIG difference between being a
mere computer operator, and playing "with the
aid of" a computer. For instance, I hated it
when the program captured the pawn on e5,
because it meant that two more pieces were
going to get traded off "evenly". But... that
decision was not mine to make, as I was
just the operator.
> Thats why I though how you
> played so fast as with Beginner Level you think 1-2 min/ move So for
> Normal Level you will think 3-4 min/ move at Complex Position. But you
> took just 1-2 min against Normal Level.
In this odds game, I considered it unfair to
press the program to move quickly; instead,
I gave it plenty of time. Had the odds been,
say, a pawn, I would have set a limit to give
the GetClub program a fair chance; perhaps
one or two seconds. But such small odds
are pointless; why not instead just give time
odds?
> I was surprised to see your giving the Knight for no reasions.
In a normal QN-odds game, that piece is
simply removed before play begins; both
programs would then be "out of book", and
it is customary for the odds-giver to move
first (as White).
I believe it would be reasonable to play a
Rook-odds game or match between these
programs, but hanging the Rook is not so
easy to accomplish in the first few moves.
Ideally, the Rook would be removed before
play begins, and it is customary to place
White's QR-pawn on a3 instead of a2
(where it would be undefended due to the
gambit Rook).
-- help bot
|
