Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 05:27:02 02/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 03, 2003 at 21:21:00, Wayne Lowrance wrote: >On February 03, 2003 at 20:42:01, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On February 03, 2003 at 19:52:42, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>Yes. Of course. Alas, the mean computer experts have invented the 6 games >>>"matches" and that is too short to exploit and harvest. Let them play 48 games >>>with the same machine of course. Promissed? >>> >>>:) >>> >>>Rolf Tueschen >> >>If Garry is the best player of the two he should be able to win without a 48 >>game disection of the program. >> >>What would the conclusion be if he needed 48 games to win, that GK can only win >>if he can completely pridict his opponents moves? >> >>It's kind of like playing poker when you can see the other guys hand. >>Cheating is another word for it. >> >>Of course _if_ these had been the rules I think the programmers would have >>devoted a little more time to the development of learning heuristic, so it may >>not be a very big issue after all. >>I mean it's not that difficult to have the program change a few of the >>parameters from game to game, ie. simply loading different "personalities" by >>random. >> >>-S. > >i Cannot resist commenting to this illogic stuff. Playing 48 games would only >wear out a human super GM >Heck Kas may have a problem with just six games. Look how long he has to go into >deep thinking with his clock running. The silicon thing never tires. How long a >period do you expect a 48 game match to played over ? 1 year, 6 months, 3 months >? Since I have given so many comments, I must concentrate my reply on some typical faults in yyour overall well put message. You reason with interesting clarity but you make also typical faults. Here for instance I wanted to give the idea of the importance of practice. It wasn't a concrete proposal. And of such sort are all your faults. I will mention them in short notes. > >Bye the way DJ would perform better in a standard tournament if DJ was just >another entrant. Yes, correct, but only if nothing is really at stake and that exactly is the reason why you won't find any sponsors for such a nonsense. Without recompensation=money no human group will tolerate such disturbances. If they do, then of course a comp has won in the lottery each round. See the Dutch Ch. >What are the other GM's to do. Spend value preparation against DJ in such >an event ? Of course not, they will spend their valuable time preparing for >overall peers in the tourney. It has already been done, bye the way (don,t >remember which program(s) or what tournaments, at what time. My memory only >remembers that it has happened. Indeed. Because their was nothing at stake. For the players! They even refused to play the machine! Or lost intentiously. > >Also give DJ credit for what it has done thus far. How many of you guys expected >this result. DJ has played at a very high GM level. Are you a priest? Give him credit, you didn't believe that could recover from your illness? Is that your best argument? What has DJ done so far. Please tell us! DJ didn't do too much. It was Kasparov alone who defined the games. Want to doubt it? "Also give credit" - is that an order? > >And do not offer a response that he is playing under some devious pre-arranged >agreement to make the match exciting. Heck his standing with his peers and the >world is involved here after loosing the IBM match. You are a priest! I knew it. His standing? You mean in chess? It's decreasing. As a human being? Please come back, next time I tell you. Whispering: Nobody believes him. All know that he's greedy after the money, nothing else. All his political dimensions have been proven a big hoax. His whole attitude in comp events is a shame as it's proven by now. He's so evil that he can bite the hand that gave him the money. Look, in Germany, his status is the product of one man! But I won't tell you the rest of that story. Perhaps next time around. Rolf Tueschen > >That is my 2 cents worth. > >Thanks >Wayne
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.