Author: Uri Blass
Date: 11:43:12 09/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 24, 2001 at 10:12:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 24, 2001 at 04:25:56, Graham Laight wrote: > >>On September 22, 2001 at 17:12:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On September 22, 2001 at 13:06:54, Marc van Hal wrote: >>> >>>>Acording to the programmer it would have a rating of 2345 >>>>After which Donner told them they realy did do everything to mislead the people >>>> >>>>To my point of vieuw he was right >>>> >>>>Marc van Hal >>> >>> >>>I think it would certainly be a 2300 player in the USCF. It pretty well >>>proved that over time. It could search 160K nodes per second, so it wasn't >>>a slouch... >> >>Belle was lucky enough to be around before anti-computer knowledge became >>widespread - and before everyone and his dog had their own chess computer. > >Not quite. I know of several "practitioners" back then. David Levy being >the best-known. He completely smashed Cray Blitz with "anti-computer" play >in 1984, for example. He Smashed Chess 4.x in the late 70's and early 80's. > >Deep Thought was the first program aggressive enough to break through his >anti-computer stuff and wipe him out without a single draw or loss. > >I believe Belle would _still_ be a > 2200 player in today's chess world... > > > > >> >>I think on that basis, you'd have to knock a few hundred points off now. >> >>-g >> > >I don't think so. If you look at the games it played vs humans, "anti-computer" >was not uncommon. We almost got beat by a 1700 player in the 1981 chess >tournament Cray Blitz won, due to his playing an anti-computer attack. How >to beat chess computers was already well-understood. As seen in various events >like the Fredkin matches, etc. The problem is that at that time humans could not get experience in anti-computer play against strong programs and today they can do it. I am also not sure if 1700 at that time was at the same level of 1700 of today. Humans learned from training against computers and it is possible that one of the things that they learned is to be better in tactics. The only way to know is to compare games of 1700 humans at that time with games of 1700 humans today in order to see if humans today do less tactical mistakes and I do not know about an investigation of this subject. Uri
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.