Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:26:41 07/13/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 1998 at 15:41:58, Shaun Graham wrote: > >>>> >>It would appear to me that not knowing who your opponent is doesn't feature in >>chess either. Or lying to the participants (biased or not) about it. If human >>players have no reason to suspect a silicon opponent, they are being given false >>information and to base their decisions on. That's worse than not knowing who >>you are up against. >> >>I'd rather wait until PC programs can defeat (or mock) the anti-computer >>strategies. Can they? > > > Not knowing who your opponent is happens all the time i must say that 95% of >all the tournament games i have ever played, i knew nothing about my opponent >except their name and rating(and sometimes not even that!). It's not false >information, it's lack of information. Regardless though this lack of >information would make you perform as you would normally against a human >opponent and that's what we're trying to find out about. Not knowing your >opponent is a computer makes you play typically, and we want to know how a >program performs against typical play. The omnly problem that you may have >here, is your ethical stance? Do you think finding out how a program plays >against typical play is worth a hoax? I'm certainly not advocating that it is, >I was just making the point of "Why computers lose" Thgey don't lose against >what we call "grandmaster chess" they lose against "anti computer chess". Bad argument. that is because you have played "nobodies". If someone comes along that starts beating masters, beats an IM here and there, *every* GM in the event will be looking at the games between rounds. Don't think the GM players take it as casual as you do... they don't...
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.