Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 19:53:08 07/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
>>I think you should re-read the goals of anti-GM, the why's, its birth. >>In the past at AEGON I have seen Rebel losing against grandmasters >>without any chance. After such a game it is very frustrating to realize >>your program didn't have just ONE little chance on counter play. >>anti-GM is about to deal with this problem. I don't know how good it is >>as 8 games is not much but in most of the 8 games it was Rebel who >>took the initiative which pleased me very much as this exactly is one >>of the goals of anti-GM. >>- Ed - >Hi Ed, >I really hate to be so skeptical but I am. I have to admit I believe >this is really more a marketing scheme than anything else, and I hope >you take no offense, none is intended. The language you use when >describing it could be lifted directly onto a glossy advertising >brochure! Making the announcement probably guaranteed you many sales. Hi Don, The announcement of anti-GM was done long time BEFORE the match. If anti-GM is only a hype (as you wonder) to make some extra money then announcing it long time before the match is the most stupid thing a company can do. What if Rebel would have lost the match with 7-1 or so? Then anti-GM would have been shot into 1,000 pieces no? Like you I like to talk about my program. >Don't think I'm accusing you of making this up, I believe you are >doing something and calling it anti-GM. I even believe things can be >done in principle. It's just that I am very skeptical this is having >much, if any effect on the results. >I was not surprised by your results against Anand and congratulate >you. It was better than I expected but within what I judged to be >reasonable expectations. Your program is one of the very best and >I don't know why everyone else was so surprised unless they don't >realize how good your program is. I expected you to do well in >the fast games and thought a win in the slow games would be an >excellent results, but the draw is a good results too. >The problem with anti-GM is that all you did was announce it and >suddenly every one was congratulating you for such a great >innovation. It's not even a new idea by any means. Anyone could >have made this announcement without writing a single line of code. >I have to remain skeptical until a whole lot more evidence comes >in. Getting a good results against Anand with an already GREAT >program does not do it for me. >Is this going to be a switch we can turn on and off in your next >program? Can we do our own tests and analyze the games and moves >and do direct comparisons so that we can judge for ourselves? >Will this mode play weaker against other computers or will it >be just as strong? Until I can satisfy my curiosity I for >one will remain a skeptic. If indeed you are doing wonderful >things with opponent modeling then I am definitely interested. In Rebel10 you will have the possibility to turn anti-GM on or off. Next the option has 3 other levels, ACTIVE, STRONG and SMART. The setting during the match was SMART in all 8 games and this will be the default setting in Rebel10. - Ed - >- Don
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.