Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 12:06:26 04/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2002 at 13:49:05, Terry McCracken wrote: >On April 22, 2002 at 04:16:24, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>On April 21, 2002 at 18:40:03, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>Not to be rude, but you said chess is more memory based, and although memory is >>>essential, it's not the number one component when a human plays chess. >>> >> >>I meant visual memory, the capability to retain visually the board patterns and >>to animate the board only with the help of the eye's mind. >>This has been clearly demonstrated by De Groot experiments in the '50. >>Expert chess players can easily memorize and reconstruct known patterns , while >>not experts aren't able to perform as the masters. >>This capability in the gifted people is also called mnemonic virtuosity and is >>easily demonstrated by blinfold games. > >I know I play chess and use to play some blindfold chess as well, back in the >80's and a bit with my Mach III Master in the early and mid 90's. >> >>>If memory was the most important facter than computers would already have humans >>>outclassed! >>> >> >>Those are the last famous words... lol Yes computers will win, someday. >> >>>One, human memory is "fuzzy" not so with the computer and two, the largest of >>>computers have more memory than humans, AFAIK! >> >>Are you sure ? I said AFAIK and these are the largest of supercomuters. They can store more than 100Terabits or bytes right? The brain can't. >> >>> >>>But not PC's;) >>> >>>So IMHO and over 20 years experience, I'm certain intelligence _is_ the key >>>component, for humans. >>> >> >>Sorry to disagree...but I have proof that also low level IQ individuals but >>exceptionally gifted in visual memory and memory capabilities in general are >>performing at master level. >>There is scientific documentation about that topic. > >You're talking about Idiot Savants! That is pure rubbish. I _KNOW_ I'm correct. >> >>>We could also quibble that memory is a part of intelligence and you would be >>>correct, it is! >>> >>>So I'll word it this way intelligence+memory+experience in that order is how we >>>humans play chess. There is one other thing I left out, talent and it is a >>>component of intelligence as well, but harder to define. >>> >>>Regards, >>> Terry >> >>Kasparov himself was tested by a team of psychologists and revealed a normal IQ >>accompanied by outstanding memorization capabilities. >> >Kasparov is above the normal range in intelligence, he is no less than 140 wich >is above the normal range and I suspect quite higher. Fischer is/was 187 at the >age of 15 or 16, who knows how high when he played Spassky? Today he's too ill >for us to see it. Dementia dosen't help! > >So I suggest you give this line of reasoning up, as it's false. > >These are ingnorant statements for a psychologist! > >But it doesn't surprise me in the least! > >>Best Regards, >>Otello > > >Best Regards, > Terry I'm sorry for bieng so blunt, but all the data I've looked at plus my own experiences, have lead me to an entirely different conclusion. I get annoyed sometimes, when I feel there is no way I can open the door to people on understanding chess and intelligence. I may not be right in all I say, but I know I'm not that wrong either, not by a longshot. This isn't just in chess, but in this case I view it (chess) closer to home, so to some degree I feel it more on a personal basis. I know that isn't good to let emotion be involved in a negative way as it impedes judgment, hence my terse responce. Let's agree to disagree. Regards, Terry
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.