Do you really think this is chess? Human chess? It isn't.
When I see mostly machine moves, it is mostly if not entirely machine chess. This is not advanced chess, it's a charade, a farce.
So far I have given some time to study the critical positions, with my talent, no machine and each and every time I see draw, draw, draw and a likely if not forced draw in this game as well.
Why you failed to take the b-pawn is simple, you are going for repetition and if that fails you will likely take the b-pawn or try some other method to draw by getting your Rook to b1 and allow b3 to be played with still good drawing chances due to your Night position as it is able to create problems by going to f5 or d5 due to Whites exposed King and weak f-pawn. Your d6 pawn is a passer as well backed up by your King.
This game is a draw, too. White might find a way but your software is at least 2800 if not higher. Yeah, your computer is drawing. smh.
Terry McCracken wrote:Do you really think this is chess? Human chess? It isn't.
When I see mostly machine moves, it is mostly if not entirely machine chess. This is not advanced chess, it's a charade, a farce.
So far I have given some time to study the critical positions, with my talent, no machine and each and every time I see draw, draw, draw and a likely if not forced draw in this game as well.
I have to agree. It is nothing wrong with this though, but they should give informations about the hardware/software and perhaps cpu time used , then it would be a bit more interesting for several reasons.
BTW the draw margin in so called 'advanced chess' is >80% thus no wonder. http://en.chessbase.com/post/correspond ... aw-problem
IMO it is not very advanced if the users just decide one or two times in the whole game between proposed moves of their software ;-)
P.S. A CCGM shouldn't be called correspondence chess grandmaster but computer chess grandmaster nowadays...
Terry McCracken wrote:Do you really think this is chess? Human chess? It isn't.
When I see mostly machine moves, it is mostly if not entirely machine chess. This is not advanced chess, it's a charade, a farce.
So far I have given some time to study the critical positions, with my talent, no machine and each and every time I see draw, draw, draw and a likely if not forced draw in this game as well.
I have to agree. It is nothing wrong with this though, but they should give informations about the hardware/software and perhaps cpu time used , then it would be a bit more interesting for several reasons.
BTW the draw margin in so called 'advanced chess' is >80% thus no wonder. http://en.chessbase.com/post/correspond ... aw-problem
IMO it is not very advanced if the users just decide one or two times in the whole game between proposed moves of their software
P.S. A CCGM shouldn't be called correspondence chess grandmaster but computer chess grandmaster nowadays...
