Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 13:21:21 02/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2003 at 16:04:30, Chessfun wrote: >On February 04, 2003 at 11:35:55, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On February 04, 2003 at 07:46:48, Joachim Rang wrote: >> >>>On February 03, 2003 at 19:05:27, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On February 03, 2003 at 18:54:54, Peter Hegger wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>...how is it that they now consistently play at the 2700-2800 level? Against >>>>>Kramnik (2810), against Bareev (2729), and now against Kasparov (2807), a >>>>>program is turning in a 2807 performance and very much _holding its own_ >>>>>Calling any modern program a 2500 player is akin to calling the above mentioned >>>>>super GM's 2500 players. >>>>>It also looks to me as though the SSDF list is getting closer to the reality of >>>>>the true state of program prowess than (admittedly) it use to be. >>>>>Any comments welcome. >>>>>Regards, >>>>>Peter >>>> >>>>A pity that you do not read. Show events are NOT a possible tool to calculate >>>>the strength. And hard competition doesn't exist. That's it. I still hold >>>>that comps are 2400 at best in fierce tournament chess. >>>> >>>> >>>>Rolf Tueschen >>> >>>you are the only one... a pity that YOU don't read: >>> >>>http://www.chessbase.com/columns/column.asp?pid=160 >>> >>>Quote: >>> >>>Discussing this with ChessBase director and computer chess guru Frederic >>>Friedel, we surmise that today's top programs play consistently at a 2500-2600 >>>level of chess quality. The difference is that they instantly and mercilessly >>>punish every human mistake and almost never let a winning position slip. This >>>near-elimination of the margin for error pushes their practical performance up >>>toward the 2800 level. >> >>You are correct. I didn't know that quote. Thank you. >> >>But please consider that Fred is no longer on science but on heavy business and >>money. I know for sure that we would understand if I could explain what I meant. >>Most people don't read - what is meant - but only what they can decrypt with >>their spectacles. But that is sufficient for the opticians but not for Rolf. >> >>I will try it in shortcut mode. >> >>I hold the following theory: >> >>1.) Human tournament chess rules! > >>2.) identity of chess programs! > >>3.) high recompensation if humans beat chess programs! > >>4.) in a defined period of time, say half a year, the progs are forbidden to be >>changed; new games into book are allowed, techno bugs are allowed to be >>corrected; but the chess system of the engine version jan-june is constant; >>books are allowed but without lines no computer ever could solve actually; >>tables must be discussed by the nasters themselves and possibly forbidden and >>reduced or such! > >>Now my thesis: Under these defined conditions progs would decrease in strength >>(Elo performance) down to 2400 the average. Max. at 2500! > > >Interesting as 1 and 3 are already pretty current and 2 is only IMO a marginal >difference. 4 now here is an interesting one, how do you take away knowledge >gained by the masters in much the same way as you intend to do with a PC >program. Also what about learning, allowed?. Then let the "nasters" sic, decide >whether PC's can play with tablebases, wonder what the answer would be lol. > > >>Now let me know what you think. Also let me know please if Fred said something >>out of his new McDonalds for freaks where you can eat Hamburgers for over 40 >>dollars each... > > >Frederic owns a McDonalds?, gotta love his business sense. > >Sarah. It seems as if the English could be disturbing the debate. But keep on with your free-style comments. Very telling. As to the masters should define, I meant to keep out of it because I don't understand why what should be allowed. See the actual event and its rules. Then your first point with the alleged taking away of knowledge, you should explain. I see no take-away of knowledge if books are not allowed with data a comp could never find. That is as if I would let play a human kid with GM analysis written on paper or whatever. I want to forbide impostering in CC. Rolf Tueschen
This page took 0.02 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.