Author: Brian Katz
Date: 08:04:31 05/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
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 Let's be practical about the entire situation. Throughout the years, in my case beginning from about 1972, long before the significant chess programs were available,I have always seen players who are playing postal (or correspondence) chess, bring their game positions to chess clubs and have fellow club members help analyse positions. This has been a practice with adjourned positions from over the board tournament games as well. That is a form of cheating too. Yes, I am sure there are many who use programs for their correspondence games. But,is this really any different than having other players help analyse positions? There are many who have used the help of master strength and above, players to help analyse. I would love to hear different views on this topic. Regards Brian >> >>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.
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.