Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 16:11:44 12/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 21, 2001 at 18:36:51, Christophe Theron wrote: >On December 21, 2001 at 17:22:04, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On December 21, 2001 at 12:12:38, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On December 21, 2001 at 05:30:32, David Rasmussen wrote: >>> >>>>On December 20, 2001 at 21:17:40, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 20, 2001 at 17:56:17, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I can't think of a reason why commercial programmers would have an edge over >>>>>>amateurs when coming up with good ideas/techniques. >>>>>> >>>>>>It's possible that, due to the amount of effort they can spend, commercial >>>>>>programmers have/test more ideas, and that's what accounts for the strength >>>>>>difference between commercials and amateurs. >>>>>> >>>>>>It seems likely, statistically speaking, that any good idea being used in a >>>>>>commercial program can also be found in an amateur program somewhere. >>>>>> >>>>>>-Tom >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I agree totally with you. Yesterday I was an amateur, and I'm not different >>>>>today. >>>>> >>>>>I'm no genius. >>>>> >>>>>What makes the difference in the end is the amount of time one is ready to spend >>>>>on his chess engine. >>>>> >>>>>I am spending 90% of my time since almost 10 years, and before that I had >>>>>already spend a fraction of my time on it since 1981/1982. >>>>> >>>>>That's all. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Christophe >>>> >>>>Didn't you just say the opposite elsewhere in the thread? That talent was at >>>>least as important as resources (time and money => more testing etc.)? >>> >>> >>> >>>You need some talent, but that's not as important as time and energy, and the >>>number of people having the needed talent is greater than the number of top >>>programs out there. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >> >>My view: >> >>- Passion 40% >>- Time 20% >>- Talent 10% >>- Programming skills 10% >>- IQ 10% >>- Chess Knowledge 10% >> >>Ed > > > >Something like that, but I would give IQ a better score. :) > >Or I am just fooling myself? :) > > > > Christophe About IQ and chess programming (my view), naturally you can not write a top chess program if you are below 100, but do you really need more than (say) 120 to make it to the top? Personally I think that passion (the will to perform) plus the available time are the 2 main ingredients. With an IQ of 140-180 you certainly have an advantage in comparison to lesser blessed chess programmers but it is all going to fail if you don't have the ability to accept and overcome major disappointments. For example, you have a spendlid idea, you put 1 full month work in that but in the end the idea is not working, worthless, 1 full month of work for nothing. If such things happen 2-3 times in a row (and they will happen!), your IQ of 140-180 is of not much help, it will probably tell you to immediately stop with chess programming and start enjoying life again and never ever deal with this crazy stuff again. However your character, the passion, the will to perform is the key to overcome any disappointing experience. So maybe having an IQ of 140-180 could even be a disadvantage <grin>. Ed
This page took 0.01 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.