Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Why comps are no GM (Anti + Statistics)

Author: Rolf Tueschen

Date: 13:49:01 02/04/03

Go up one level in this thread


On February 04, 2003 at 15:54:32, Andreas Guettinger wrote:

>It can. With tactics, even weaker comps can beat GMs. See Kramnik and Kasparov.
>Be careful, I studied many hours statistics at university. But you're right, it
>is statistics.
>
>Your anti-comp strategy system IS a myth. I laugh always when I see this
>argument. If one traines anti-computer, then he manages to get the computer to
>look really silly in ONE game, but the 50 games he lost until he got this game
>he never shows. Your anti-computer strategy is unsuitable for tournament play!!
>
>
>But maybe you manage to win a 24 game tournament against a top program with your
>anti-computer strategy? Show us! :)
>
>regards
>Andreas

Please say just a few words about the phenomenon that weak players could beat
2700 comps. Would you believe if I claimed the same for a match against human
GM? I think that is the reason why we should discuss the whole question a bit
deeper.

Just anothother point. If you have studies stats you must know that your former
sentence is wrong. That if I put the progs on 2400 I must also put the best
humans on 2400. This is nonsense.

Rolf Tueschen



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.