Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:49:30 04/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2002 at 13:10:06, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >On April 29, 2002 at 12:26:15, Uri Blass wrote: > > >>It is possible that the computers could play also better at 40/2 hours and even >>if you assume that the computers play the same I am not sure if he could win the >>better positions at 40/2 hours. >> > >I agree. > >Two things that favours comps at 40/2h : > >1) Computer can deepen very much the analysis at 40/2 and reach elo level far >better than shorter reflection time. > >2) Humans tends to fatigue mentally in the long run. > > >Any objections ? Several, from _lots_ of experience. The more time per move you give the players, the _better_ the human does relative to the computer. You only have to do a simple test to see this illustrated... Play any good player, using a computer. Play him 10 one minute games, then 10 5 minute games, then 10 10 minute games, then 10 15 minute games, then 10 30 minute games, then 10 one-hour games. That is far enough. Look at the results. I think the trend would be intuitively obvious to the most casual observer. :) > >w.b.r. >Otello > > >>He had the advantage against hiarcs and had a winning position against Junior >>but I am not sure if he could win both games. >>Remember that humans do not play perfect even at 2 hours/40 moves. >> >>Uri
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.