Author: Howard Exner
Date: 00:47:44 04/24/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 23, 1998 at 23:36:30, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 23, 1998 at 21:13:32, Howard Exner wrote: > >>>IMHO, you should change 6 months to a year to 6-10 years. The Micros >>>are *not* a factor of two away from playing evenly with GM players yet. >>>Not even close... >>> >>>We already have a PII/400 at the office. Intel says 450 late this >>>year, and (possibly) Merced next year. We already have machines as >>>fast as merced... they are spelled "alpha"... no one's *close* to a >>>GM yet... >> >>IMHO you should change "no one's *close* to GM yet" to no one's >>close to a super GM yet. I believe that the top micro's on this fast >>hardware >>play at a weak GM level (2450 - 2550). > >at faster time controls, yes. at 40/2, no. not yet... Are too :) > >an occasional win will happen. but when you see a "top micro" get >squashed by a USCF master, you *know* it is not a GM. Since we are talking elo and 40/2 post such an example of this "squashing". There isn't any on record that I've seen. >GM's don't lose >to masters very often... yet on ICC these programs lose to them on a >regular basis... except that the "operators" won't play such a player >more than once... We've been here before on this topic as it seems to emerge from time to time. I know of your arguments that depict weaknesses in computer play and have no argument with any of them. I am largely basing my belief on years of playing over thousands of games. While I am no more than an Expert level player I do believe that I can preview a game and recognize good vs bad play. Not unlike recognizing high levels of play in Sports while not being able to duplicate what I am viewing. (as others do also) I believe I'm right in claiming weak GM levels of play for the micros. I could change that belief but have read or seen nothing that can show me that "micros are not close to GM level. Remember that there are very many GM's rated 2450 -2500. I'm interpreting not close to GM as to mean roughly 2350 or so. One of your major arguments is still flawed. The one that goes like "I watched an IM beat Crafty on the servers last night". Those are definately not 40/2 encounters. I thought the highest ratings on the servers belong to computers. Is that so? Anyway it's fun to rehash this "how strong are the micros". We will no doubt have the same discussion in a few months from now. :)
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.