Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Computer haters?: No, you are realistic!

Author: Jeroen Noomen

Date: 13:00:30 07/17/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 17, 2000 at 14:58:22, blass uri wrote:

>>In open positions DJ scored 4 out of 6, which is a TPR way above 2800.
>>In closed positions DJ scored 0,5 out of 3, which is rather bad.
>
>I think it scored 2 draws against akopian and adams in closed positions.

The game vs. Adams was a Ruy Lopez exchange. This is surely not a blocked
position. It was an ending, quite open with White having the better pawn
structure and Black having the two bishops. I absolutely do not count this one
as a blocked position. In a blocked position the situation of the pawns is thus:
They face each other and can't move. Clearly this is not the case in this game.

>I also do not think that it played clearly open positions against Bareev or
>Huebner.

Huebner tried to block the position but he failed. And at the first opportunity
he made a big tactical mistake, and committed another one by resigning too
early. Bareev sacrificed a pawn early on, so it had nothing to do with the type
of the position. The only question in that game was: Can Bareev prove he has
enough compensation or not. The ending was quite tricky, also having nothing to
do with blocked positions.

Besides, you (and all the others!) do not come up with arguments to prove that I
am wrong on my thesis that computers obtain GM results, but that their knowlegde
is far behind. Does nobody want to disagree with this!? Nobody wants to question
my remark that calculation power doesn't solve the problems computer programs
are still facing!? Come on guys!

I started my love for computer chess in 1980. I played the challenger 7, 10,
Voice and won easily. They were weak in all aspects of the game. Then came
Turbostar, Super Conny and still these were weak in closed positions and king's
attacks. Then I bought my first 'real' computer, the Mephisto MM 4. I liked that
one very much, because it played positional chess. Ed did a great job there.
With fast hardware he would have beaten Richard Lang easily with the MM 4
program. Still, the same problem appeared: Although the MM 4 knew more about
blocked structures, it could be beaten by King's attacks or long term plans.

After MM 4 I got interested in PC programs. Gideon, The ChessMachine, Genius
were the first one. Still the same problem: No good plans in blocked positions,
no understanding for King's attacks. Now we are 10 years further in time. PC's
are 100 times faster (I am not sure about this figure, I estimate it) and DJ
plays on a super PC, equalling 4,5 GHz. And what do I see: NO understanding of
blocked positions, no understanding of how to prevent or defend against a king's
attack.

Conclusion: I am in the computerworld for 20 years. I saw them starting with
less than 1000 Elo. Now they have above 2600. But two problems remain, they were
not solved in 1980, not in 1990 and not even in 2000: Blocked positions and
king's attacks.

Jeroen

Jeroen



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.