Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 18:40:47 05/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 25, 2002 at 16:24:21, Uri Blass wrote: >On May 25, 2002 at 15:02:51, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On May 25, 2002 at 11:07:16, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On May 25, 2002 at 05:07:17, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On May 25, 2002 at 03:38:11, Jeroen Noomen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 24, 2002 at 18:34:18, BORIS YUDOVIN wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Please answer my question. >>>>>>If Fritz 8 play against different people with Elo rating >>>>>>2200-2300 (corresp.chess ) what result can we expect. >>>>>>(score %).Amount of games 500. >>>>>>Thank You.Boris >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>If you play against correspondence chess players of 2200-2300, >>>>>there is a big chance you play Fritz, Shredder, Tiger, Rebel, >>>>>or another chess program :-). >>>>> >>>>>Jeroen >>>> >>>>I think that this is mainly the case with higher rated correspondence players. >>>>I believe that most 2200-2300 correspondence players or not use a computer or >>>>use programs only for a short time. >>>> >>>>I expect top programs to get 80% against 2200-2300 correspondence players. >>>> >>>>The match of Steve Ham against computers when Steve Ham(2508 ICCF) lost 2.5-1.5 >>>>proved that programs can get a correspondence performance of more than 2500. >>>> >>>>Steve Ham did not play anti computer but most correspondence players do not try >>>>to play in anti-computer style and if you say that the correspondence players >>>>cannot use hardware for 24 hours per move in every game then I can answer that >>>>today it is possible to use better hardware then the hardware that was used >>>>against Steve Ham. >>>> >>>>My experience in correspondence games also suggest that computers can get >>>>performance of more than 2500(I used also my head because performance of more >>>>than 2500 was not enough for me to be the Israeli champion) >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>Most 2200-2300 corr games i see are 100% computer moves Uri. >>> >>>That you 'can' get higher with a computer doesn't say anything >>>about reality here. >>> >>>Another thing where i have to laugh loud for always is that all >>>correspondence chess players who are themselves rated pretty low, >>>that they conclude that a certain program X is best program. >>> >>>The reason behind this is that they suck so much that they usually >>>go for the biggest patzer move. So if they use more than 1 engine >>>to analyze with, then what happens is they play the minimum strength >>>of the both engines, resulting obviously in worse play than simply >>>using 1 engine and giving it 24 hours of computing time. >>> >>>However the strong world top corr players i know, they all distrust >>>the computer completely. These are rated obviously way higher than >>>2200-2300, and their own rating OTB rating is not always saying >>>something about how strong they play their corr games. >>> >>>Analytical insight, systematic analysis, and taking time at the right >>>moment are the bottom lines. >>> >>>No computer has a chance against them. Some are rated 'only' 2400 >>>which obviously means that playing with a computer only is not garantueeing >>>a high rating anymore in 2002. >> >>Let's not forget that correspondence ratings are probably inflated a lot. >>The best players at this specialty probably never played a single game. >>For instance, I have no doubt in my mind that Kasparov will eat alive any >>correspondence player by a huge margin. What would be the rating of Kasparov if >>it decides to really go into it? 3000?. > >I do not think that it is going to be 3000. > >Remember that the facts that both sides use computers reduces significantly the >advantage of kasparov. >I guess that he is not going to be more than 100 elo higher than the best >correspondence player and I doubt if he is going to be better than the best >correspondence player. Do you really doubt it? Once you said that a computer could have a better static evaluation of an ending than Capablanca (it was IIRC KBPPP vs KNPPP 3 vs 1 on each flank). I think that you really underestimate the knowledge and power of those kind of guys. Miguel >The players who play against kasparov may prefer to play for a draw and not to >take risks and kasparov may have bigger problems to win games. > >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.