At 04:23 PM 1/20/2007, you wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 15:34 -0700, Arend Bayer wrote:
> ...
> On 1/20/07, Don Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If what you are saying is true, this is a waste of time. ...
But I'm not talking about opening preparation.
My point is all about just a few critical moves, not the majority of
them.
If you are given twice as much thinking time, there is bound to be 2 or
3 moves in a 300 move game where it makes a difference in the quality
of
those 2 or 3 moves. And that is worth 1 or more ranks of strength.
...
i think these kinds of moves are much more frequent in to, maybe a
dozen (or two) for each player (in the 1-dan area)
I believe this is all part of the strength/time relationship curve. If
there is
a huge disparity in playing strength, giving you a thousand times more
thinking
time won't be nearly enough to make up the gap.
i agree, there is a huge difference and huge disparities in time in
general will not help. (you may play better, but you won't win).
...
It's the same, I believe, with humans and probably why everyone here
seems to
believe what I'm saying is wrong, they think that I am implying that you
can
spend a few minutes on a move and play champion level. But if you are
given twice as much thinking time, it's not going to turn you games
from idiotic to brilliant. It will improve the (average) quality of
your moves, but barely enough to notice.
i agree.
also i suspect that at least 33% of the moves (at my 1-dan level) are
wrong (what you might call in chess a "blunder"?).
what do other people of different strengths think about this 33%?
thanks
---
vice-chair http://ocjug.org/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
