Author: Jonas Cohonas
Date: 18:33:46 11/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 2001 at 20:47:54, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On November 08, 2001 at 08:58:30, Jonas Cohonas wrote: > >I already answerred that question by beating Tiger on a 1.4Ghz machine >some time ago. If you would know tiger well you know that no matter >what time you give it, if it decides for a move it will keep playing >that move. > >I beated it by 'accident' kind of 2 times because i prevented it from >castling. by doing that i lost a pawn, but then it didn't do anything >to escape from that castling prevention (i'm sure shredder would have >done it and some other programs too). > >so it lost. > >I do not understand why you can't make the induction step that if >it can be beaten at 15 15 (which i use to practice, not to beat compu's), >then why wouldn't it be possible at 40 in 2? > >somehow you're the only computer guy who can't make that induction step. > >Human obviously is better when time gets better for him. > >Try to get a 1800 rated i'd say, perhaps they play without rewards. > By accident, do you mean you got lucky?? :) I am quite convinced that CT14.0 is stronger at 40/120 than 15 15! Do you really mean to say that: CT14.0 is as good at 15 15 as it is at 40/120? When you say that CT14.0 will stick with a move no matter what time you give it, do you mean that seriously? if so and what you say is true about CT14.0, then CT14.0 at 15 15 is as strong as CT14.0 at 40/120, try convincing Christophe Theron of that..... And what do you mean by: "Human obviously is better when time gets better for him." do you have any proof of that? I am sure that a lot of programmers and Human GM's disagree.. Regards Jonas
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.