Author: blass uri
Date: 00:02:18 09/11/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 11, 1998 at 01:23:39, Serge Desmarais wrote: >On September 11, 1998 at 00:01:10, Roy Brunjes wrote: > >> >>I think the subject says it all. Of course this is a huge matter of opinion, >>but if a large group like this comes close to a consensus, then I'll consider >>the input valuable. To me, human play contains more subtle, >>positional/strategic stuff as well as speculative sacrifices (fairly rare for >>programs I gather - though some claim Hiarcs 6 does spec sacs). >> >>Thanks! >> >>Roy > > > What does it mean "playing like a human"? If you look at the games of a >Petrosian and compare them with those of Tal, Fischer, Kasparov etc. you will >find that ONE SINGLE human style doesn't exist. Your question seems to imply >that humans play chess in a way, while computers/programs play another way. In >any given chess position, you do not have an infinite number of good/playable >moves, but still more than one (usually or at least often). Now, today's >programs do play moves that any human could/would play Sometimes computers play stupid moves that no human in the level of at least 2000 elo could play. I cannot say it about grandmasters Uri
This page took 0.01 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.