WGM, I dont find it interesting losing to a Program

[kgburcham]

I enjoyed listening to WGM Polgar talking about computer programs.
If this link does not work, just search Judith Polgar computer.

enjoy
kburcham

[Albert Silver]

I enjoyed listening to WGM Polgar talking about computer programs.
If this link does not work, just search Judith Polgar computer.

enjoy
kburcham

It's a point of view, and I know that many share it. However, I have a story to illustrate there is more to this.

A close friend, with 2 IM norms under the belt, and aged 49, was still chasing down that elusive 3rd norm to get the title, and last October played a norm event where he came next to last.

Norm events aren't that common here in Rio de Janeiro, and the result really rattled him. While leaving the venue after the closing ceremonies, he was complaining about everything from the food to the air-conditioning, though I knew him well enough to see that what really upset him was the fear that he might not achieve his goal.

Finally he said that one major problem was the lack of strong events with strong players to keep his rhythm of play going, so that when an event did take place he was not in shape. I told him this was bull, and that if he was willing to swallow his pride, I could fix this. I set him to play against Rybka at 45mins against 3. "Three?", he complained, "that's humiliating." I explained to him that even at 3 mins, if he played his normal style of play, training his openings and not making any special adjustments to the computer, he would be up against a 2600 opponent at the least. I told him that even at such a handicap, he should expect to lose very heavily. In compensation, he would be practicing against a monster opponent, and in the post-mortem would know exactly what the opponent saw or not during the game, plus when he actually played normal masters, they would seem a lot easier in comparison.

He followed my advice, and after 4 months had played 35-40 games with 1 win and a half dozen draws. He was full of admiration for Rybka, and described the amazing resources Rybka found during their games. Then in March, now aged 50, another norm event came, and this time he achieved his final norm.

He told me that his percentile score against Rybka has not improved, though he has played now twice that number of games, but he has no doubt as to the benefit this training has brought him.

Albert

[Mike S.]

You have given him a very good advice!

Also, such an asymmetric time control saves time and/or allows more practise games within the same time. Although, the human player loses most of the time he usually would have available, for thinking during the opponent's time. So, he is certainly somewhat stronger in 45m vs. 45m, than in 45m vs. 3m.

Not for masters, but for less strong hobby players, even depth levels can be interesting to try against. Some time ago, I tried it against Rybka set to 2 plies of depth (my ego forbids to set it to 1 one ply, only ). I won one game and lost about 2 or 3 dozen. But I played at blitz speed. I cannot play slow against an opponent who responds immediatly.

P.S. Judith Polgar is a regular GM in the 2700 category, not just WGM.