Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:03:57 07/13/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 1998 at 15:11:48, Don Dailey wrote: >On July 13, 1998 at 05:28:26, Shaun Graham wrote: > >>Concerning the Kotronias Fritz match: >> >> Well a single match doesn't prove or support anything. If kasparov or Anand >>played most any GM alive, a 3 game match the score would be 3-1 or even 3 0!! >>Fischer beat larsen 6 0 does that mean Larsen is not grandmaster strength? >>Further Grandmasters have an unfair advantage against computers in that in >>professional chess, GMs prepare for each other. Kotronias can prepare for >>fritz, but Fritz can't prepare for kotronias(except IF a special opening book >>has been prepared but still not the same) Further Kotronias WOULD BE EXPECTED >>TO BEAT some people with the GM title 3 0! At least Fritz had a point. Seeing >>that he had a point, and you attempt tosuggest that a 3 game match is >>evidence,would you claim that Fritz is I.M strength since it BEAT a grandmaster >>after all. If you accept that Fritz is I.M strength, then you should know that >>there are I.M.'s that are stronger than many grandmasters case in point "Igor >>Ivanov, Sokolin, Michael Brooks". Many I.M.s get the grandmaster title simply >>by playing in lots of tournaments in europe, if you are an I.M, and you play >>enough especially in lower category tourneys you will get the 3 GM norms. In >>the New york open there were several GMs in the under 2400 section, and even a >>couple rated under 2300!! So is Fritz a GM? >> Also GM's often beat computers by playing anti computer chess instead of >>regular >>chess, so if i showed up and was bieng secretly told moves by fritz, and no one >>knew to play ANTI COMPUTER chess against me i'd kill and have my norm! So yes >>Fritz is a grandmaster at regular chess(at least on a P400)but because it has >>weaknesses that it's opponent can know and play against, and fritz can not alter >>itself that results in losses. Fritz is a GM if it were in a human body! > >I agree with your logic completely. I also believe Fritz is close to >Grandmaster strength, but probably not quite there. The 3 game match >does not disprove this in any way. > >I'm sure there will now be many posts saying Fritz is nowhere near this, >and that no micro is anywhere near it. I think this is just not >logical though. If Fritz had won the match, I think a lot of people >would be rationalizing this victory away, now they will say the match >"proves" man's superiority. > >Your point is well taken that Grandmasters vary a lot in strength. If >Fritz were to get into the system to achieve it's 3 grandmaster norms >it would probably have a difficult time, but would have a chance given >enough attempts. > > >- Don based on experience I don't think this is true. The best chance comes early, not later, because Fritz has serious holes in it, as does every program I can think of, and GM's are going to find 'em, and drive trucks through 'em. And giving them more tournaments to find these openings is suicidal. So the key questions to me are: (1) is Fritz the best commercial program? answer seems to be yes, if you are talking about playing computer vs computer matches. It's proven that on the SSDF it seems. (2) Is fritz or any other program a GM? not even close yet. Good chess players find and exploit holes in every program running. I think that many programs might fit right in the middle of the IM class, although they will not be nearly as consistent as IM players, because they will beat an IM on tactics, then get crushed in an elementary ending. A PC GM is a ways away, IMHO, still. Getting closer, but not here. *yet*. But given enough time...
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.