Author: Pete Galati
Date: 19:11:41 01/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 17, 2001 at 20:48:02, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Hi Dann: >Irrelevant can be, but, what is not in this field after all? We are here to get >some fun -some programmers maybe sometimes get something more, but they are a >royal minority- and to discuss GM or not GM level of playing by comps is an >issue so good as any other to that end. I do not dare to inspect closely and >seriously how much relevant is whatever kind of stuff here: I run the risk to >conclude I must bail out to save my precious time and with that I would lose a >fraction of my total and not very big stock of entertainning. >BTW, my feeling is: best commercial comps are in the wild no-man-land between IM >and GM marks. >My best wishes >Fernando The problem with this arguement that keeps coming up, is that they are distinctly different (GMs and computer programs). It's getting to the point where PC programs are giving GMs a real run for the money, but even IF they get to the point where strong GMs can no longer compete with the stronger programs, they're still going to be different beasts. So in some respects, I think we could posibly also be asking, have GMs become as good as computer Chess programs, because in some catagories, I think the programs are clearly ahead (trolling tendancy getting the better of me) that being tactics, consistency, not tiring, not being influenced by any emotion. But, they don't have a good an ability to plan and think way ahead, they also have difficulty with sacrifices. Pete
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.