Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 16:08:09 07/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 2001 at 07:27:10, CLiebert wrote: >On July 20, 2001 at 16:47:29, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On July 20, 2001 at 04:13:44, CLiebert wrote: >>[snip] >>>OK I understand your point. But would you admitt that thinking like this would >>>mean that every development in computerchess-engines could be canceled, because >>>nobody asks for the progress of a new tiger, shredder oder fritz?! >> >>No. People will still buy the top SSDF program which is 2 ELO better than its >>opponent with an error bar of +/-35 ELO without even looking at the features. >>So then they can say they have the "strongest" program. And nobody is going to >>sit still. If development on the professional engines stopped, eventually the >>amateurs would pass them. I think there will always be a gap between the >>professional engines and the amateur engines for 3 reasons: >>1. The professionals get to spend a lot more time developing >>2. The data in the form of opening books will always be better because amateurs >>are not capable of assembling a professional quality opening book >>3. Most amateur innovations are openly discussed and most profesional >>innovations are kept secret. > > >Some profis are only profis via definition, like Ban or Uniacke f. ex.! > >"I think there will always be a gap between the professional engines and the >amateur engines..." > >That´s what I have written before, I agree! There is still a difference for >different reasons. One might be forgotten always: >may be they are still better - working harder is one point, having more talent >another, isn´t it ... ?! I really doubt that every single pro is more talented that every single of the best amateurs programmers. One may be more, another could be less, who knows. In fact, it is really difficult to prove when one group invest one order of magnitude more effort and resources than the other. Regards, Miguel > >Regards >Christian > > > > >>>This isn´t my opinion, because every progress is still faszinating. As well as >>>the differnce of 100-150 Elo between amateurs and profis. >> >>I agree with this assessment. >> >>>Few years ago I played simultan against GM Matthias Wahls in Hamburg (ok, I lost >>>quite fast, not my day...) and we talked about chess and elos. I asked him what >>>it means if he has to play against a player who is rated 50 elo points higher >>>than himself. He said "50 Elopoints are world but I woud try the best"... >> >>Even so, you will get a lot of goodwill generated by fixing the "flush the >>toilet" bug. > >Again: it´s up to CB to do this, not to me!
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.