Thanks for the reply John. I'll be cheering for you in the real match! Don
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 3:49 PM, John Tromp <[email protected]> wrote: > hi Don, > > > I cannot relate so much to go as I am a chess player. I know that if I > > were in his position and I were to play a serious match against some > > computer chess opponent (one weak enough that I had a realistic chance of > > winning) then my test matches would really be more like "training > matches" > > as I feel that going all out would be the best way to find out what I was > up > > against and to learn about my opponent. John may have a completely > > different notion however about how this should be approached and out of > > curiosity I would like to know if he is willing to share his experiences. > > This is something you cannot tell me. > > I agree the best way to prepare against a computer is just to play your > best, > as you would in any serious game. That is exactly how I played these games. > > I believe that whatever weaknesses the computer has will become apparent in > a > serious game just as likely, if not more so, than in an "experimental game" > where you run a greater risk of premature defeat. The longer a game lasts, > and > the longer it remains balanced, the more opportunities for weaknesses to > become > apparent. That goes for human's weaknesses as well... > > regards, > -John > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
