Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 10:58:19 02/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2003 at 12:14:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 16, 2003 at 06:46:33, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On February 15, 2003 at 22:17:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On February 15, 2003 at 14:52:10, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On February 15, 2003 at 14:34:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Answer me this, What Difference Does it make if you play more >>>>>>positional chess, if you cannot defeated me?? >>>>> >>>>>If that were the case, I would agree. But by the same token, do you want >>>>>your program to play 30 brilliant moves and one lemon move, over and over? >>>>>That one lemon will drag your performance _way_ down at the top of the rating >>>>>scale. >>>> >>>> >>>>Bob, may I point out with humility that this is exactly my weak-chain argument? >>>>Finally we are on the point. Did you ever reflect what would happen if >>>> >>>> - in a really recompensating money atmosphere and >>>> >>>> - after top players adopted specific comp related chess? >>>> >>>>And that on the base of a known permanent weakness? >>>> >>>>That is the point. And not the typical hype based on show events /commercials. >>>> >>>>What is you impression with the GM play on ICC? But note, Roman D. had to face >>>>an always changed version [on the base of his own hints]. Guess what will happen >>>>if several top GM work hard on a counter strategy against comps, in other words >>>>if GM adopt 'Eduard'... >>>> >>>>Only then, and that is my argument since long, the actual commercial progs begin >>>>to SUCK. But on a permanent base! >>>> >>>>My questions to Amir went a bit in the same direction. Let's see how far the >>>>experts can open their mind. >>>> >>>>Rolf Tueschen >>> >>> >>>The question is "too hard" for someone that is _not doing this_. IE who can >>>say what a top GM player would do when folks start waving a million bucks >>>around? IE would he try to stomp the program and end the matches for years? >>>Would he intentionally "play down" to guarantee another million dollar match >>>next year? >>> >>>I'm not capable or qualified to answer that... >>> >>>And anything I might say would be absolute 100% speculation. >> >> >>But - you are qualified enough, perhaps the best qualified in the field, to >>judge the actual strength of the progs in relation to GM and their chess. Say, >>the GM would run wild and were determined to kill, would they succeed or not, >>that is the question, NOT would they really want that or would they do it. >> >>I know the answer from all what you said. But you want to hide it? For what >>sensible goal? Do you want to avoid the deception of computerchess lovers >>worldwide? Or don't you want to harm the future show events? >> >> >>Rolf Tueschen > > >The answer is "none of the above." I'm not willing to speculate about things >that I ultimately have no way of proving. IE how can I prove what he was >thinking and what his motivation was? And without any way to prove/disprove >anything, I don't see how my comments could help, although they could >certainly hurt. :) I have a very simple question without speculations. How fatal are the actual weaknesses of computer programs? A) against players like Eduard B) against Super-GM C) against a group of GM [playing them in tournament chess] who would concentrate on so called computerchess, here I agree I have a somewhat theoretical model in mind, namely the idea that they could develop a sort of strong anti-comp strategy, I am not talking about the actually known anti-comp of Eduard or tricks like Trojan or whatever. 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.