Author: Jeroen Noomen
Date: 08:14:07 07/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2000 at 16:26:07, Olaf Jenkner wrote: Hi, I don't think you are a computer hater, but instead you take the bull by the horns: A chess program will never be of GM strenght as long as the main weaknesses aren't solved. Like f.e. blocked positions or king's attacks. The main purpose of most programmers is to improve search techniques, to improve NPS. As long as these programmers do not take notice of the games played here, a computer will still lose games as in Kramnik-DJ or DJ-Piket. So I have to agree with you fully here: These games show ow BAD chess programs play in certain positions. The game isn't over yet, the human GM is still superior! Akopian, Piket and Kramnik played perfect anti-computer chess. Leko chose to play a normal game and was punished. In normal games (open, with tactics) NO one can beat the monsters. They simply have 3000 Elo in this type of position. It is suicide to try to win such types of position. But in closed positions or king's attacks the PC power gets you nowhere. Therefore I'd like to see all GM's play these type of position. Only then programmers will start to think about solving this problem. The more programs gets crushed this way, the faster the problem will be solved! Jeroen >I'm not a computer hater but very happy, if computers lose against humans. The >reason is that only strong chess players can show us the weakness of programs. >GM should learn to win against programs on fast hardware. Then the game starts >again and we'll have a lot of fun during the next years.
This page took 0.03 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.