Author: blass uri
Date: 21:27:12 07/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 2000 at 23:17:29, James Robertson wrote: >On July 13, 2000 at 09:31:37, ujecrh wrote: > >>On July 12, 2000 at 23:53:10, Victor Valenzia wrote: >> >>>How do you think that today’s best players would fare if they did NOT know that >>>they were playing against a computer? Suppose, for the sake of argument, they >>>were only told that they were playing against a very formidable opponent. >>>Let’s take a top program on super hardware (i.e. Deep Junior in Dortmund). The >>>operator would somehow have the moves transmitted to him, perhaps by a tiny >>>earpiece. Without the “anti-computer” strategy, how do you think that the top >>>players in the world would fare in this scenario? What do you think the >>>hardware’s ELO would be in this case? >> >>This is probably hard to predict because, even if no anti-computer technique >>would be used, it would also avoid situations when the GM is simply psyched out >>because he knows he is playing a computer. > >At least at Dortmund, only Kramnik used anti-computer play. Bareev threw away a >pawn in a move designed to "confuse" the computer that he knew would never >confuse a human. It is quite possible DJ's performance would not go up at all >(at least in this event) if the players did not know they were playing a >computer. > >James Adams used anti-computer play. I read that the way that adams could win Junior in blitz in the same opening but Junior played better at tournament time control so he could not win. Uri > >> >>Ujecrh
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.