One of those books with lots of words and no pictures.

The Game of Champions (and computers)

I found a copy of the elusive 1st season of The Gilmore Girls today. I knew it existed out there at $39.99 and searched hard until I tracked it down.

Then to balance out my shopping and stop my brain from rotting away during the holidays, I bought a book called 'The Best American Science Writing 2006'.

The first article was about chess programmes - those ones that beat grandmasters (I love the term 'grandmaster'). The kind that beat Kasparov. I love Kasparov. I briefly wanted to marry him. I read his biography back in my chess phase in the late 90s. I liked him and Tal. Tal was just a crazy mo-fo who did lots of psychological stuff to put the other player off as well as having a slashing kinda style, and Kasparov beat Karpov who was the epitome of anal-ness. My brother was a Fischer fan. Fischer was one crazy fellow too (there seems to be a motif here - grandmasters are all a little nutty?). I think in the end he thought aliens were after him and became a hermit.

So that was an easy start for my reading foray into the science world. It needs to be easy because I quit science after fifth form. Though, let it be noted, I got 90% for it in School Cert.

It kinda made the point that these computer programmes are getting so advanced that they're seeing possibilities that even humans wouldn't have considered. Moves that a bunch of grandmasters can sit around and watch and have no idea where they're going with certain moves until deep into the game. Moves that contradict opening and endgames that have been staples for decades.

Some former grandmaster guy said, 'Computers helped me to discover a number of fundamentally new positions that no one had ever expected, some of which were outstandingly beautiful.' I love that a board game can be 'outstandingly beautiful.' And another top ranked player said he played crazy moves people weren't expecting - moves that are 'computeresque'.

That point being that computers can almost be creative or intuitive...... rather than just robotic. Real players do well by imitating the play of computers, not the other way around. It's a switch in the programming style, which previously tried to create computers that mimicked the playing style of certain grand-masters.

But I don't know if I buy it. I don't know if I want to buy it. I think all us real chess fans appreciate the difference between a move that will win the game and a move that will win the game elegantly. I like the image of a computer programme being ruthless and robotic (like Karpov). Not elegant and creative (like my hero, Kasparov).

It's one of those sad frontiers that has been crossed though, when there are computer programmes that no human can beat. It's one of those things that everybody knew could be done, but maybe it sh0uldn't be. I don't like that a game full of guts and grace and creativity can basically be broken down into probability and statistics. Where's the fun and psychological warfare in that?

There was this sad little story about a fairly good player out there who was playing against some internet opponent and became convinced it was Bobby Fischer (he who became a hermit and disappeared from the world chess scene at his peak). He even said to the Sunday Telegraph that the games were 'what an undiscovered Mozart symphony would be to a music lover'. Anyhow..... turns out it was just a computer programme the was playing, and the guy running it had purposely made a few errors at the beginning to dig the computer a hole to work its way out of as an experiment, which it did with a certain amount of flair. Disappointing!

Anyhow. One article down, many many more to go. I might delve into whether or not there really is an obesity epidemic or if it's just a theory that's been popularised by scientists commissioned by the diet industry now.....

* * *


And since my science book reading project is such a lofty goal, I thought buying some pretty new earrings would help. I concentrate better while wearing pretty earrings.

* * *

Chess advice my dad gave me during my Year of Chess.

1) Spend the early part of the game establishing a strong hold over the centre. Work your centre pawns out in a V-formation so that they're backing each other up and then work the bishops and knights out to defend the pawns or attack your opponent's ones. This is the part where you're digging your trenches and lining up your soldiers. You're both sussing out who has the best weapons and who'll do better if you actually attack...... Once you think you have the upper-hand, then go for it..... but there's nothing wrong with patience. A good game's a long game.

2) If you can get your knights working together you can get a strong position. This isn't essential, but it's neat when it happens. They're the only piece in a chess game that can jump over other pieces, so they're much more useful than other pieces at the beginning when the board is crowded. They can cause a good fork (where you move to a square where you'll be able to take two different pieces, so your opponent can only save one of them).

3) Don't be afraid of forcing an exchange as long as you'll come out better off (maybe you lose the same number of pieces, but you force them to double-up their pawns). The good old sacrificial pawn..... I like getting rid of a few pieces to open up the game and will try to take away the pieces my opponent likes the best :)

4) Don't bring Queenie out too early (you'll just have to waste moves retreating her if she gets threatened - wait til she has room to move, then let her fly).

5) The worst thing you ever have to do is take back a move. It wastes two turns. It's better to do something tiny like move a pawn forward than to do something dramatic that you will just have to retreat from.

6) Sometimes the only defence is a counter-attack. If someone traps a piece of yours, form a distraction somewhere else on the board by threatening one of their pieces to buy time. Don't give up hope too soon! It's like Black Hawk Down..... that's your little guy out there, do your damnedest to get him back to safety!

7) The basic values are: pawn (1), knight/bishop (3), rook (5), queen (8) and king (invaluable). So, for example sacrificing a bishop and a pawn to take your opponent's rook could be a good thing to do.

8) Try to avoid pawn islands (broken rows of pawns)

9) Try to avoid doubling up pawns (having two in the same row because you've taken a piece with one of them).

10) When you place your piece down on the board give a 'knowing look'. It will make your opponent think you have some devious plan somewhere down the line. They hate it when they think you see something they don't.