Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi Paul.
It's not really the same thing is it. Geller the 'engine.' 🙂
I think it was so unique it was brilliant and anyway you are allowed to look
at games played by humans in a DB or book, they just jumped the gun
and never waited for the book to come out (it did in 1957 and I have a copy) 😉
You could not even make a small claim for outside , lose one or draw both.
But no engines involved, just humans - am I breaking the rules?
That's a great question, and it makes me laugh, because I have already had people do that to me in tournaments here, and I've only been playing a month and a half! It was a fast tournament, and I picked up the pattern pretty quick, so I played 3 different moves in the same position!
Since this is CC chess, and you can refer to other games, I considered it to be an enterprising and creative approach to the tournament! I certainly don't fault my opponents, and I admire their strategy.
I personally have no issue with the other guys copying Geller, because they still had to make the decision as to whether or not his move was good or not, and they still had to also assess the responses played on the board.
This may sound like an overly simplistic approach, but I think that as long as the player is making his own independent decisions about what to move or when to draw, and isn't soliciting unique opinions from a human or engine, I'm good with it. And we all know for sure that the Argentinians were collaborating on their analysis before the game, so the Soviets were sort of leveling the playing field, in a manner of speaking!
In the case of Gothenburg, I think chess was enriched immensely. We were able to see six strong GMs play in what amounted to a thematic "mini-tournament", and were left with a great story that has stood the test of time.