Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 07:11:52 11/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 16, 2003 at 08:17:37, Sune Larsson wrote: >On November 16, 2003 at 07:10:14, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 16, 2003 at 06:28:37, Sune Larsson wrote: >> >>>On November 16, 2003 at 05:38:20, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On November 16, 2003 at 05:20:04, Gerhard Sonnabend wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi ! >>>>> >>>>>As you can see since (deep)fritz 7 there is no progress against other engines. >>>>>It looks like that frans has tried to optimize his creation for playing >>>>>against strong humans - a good decision. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>No >>>> >>>>We have no evidence if new Fritz is better or worse against humans and it is not >>>>a good decision because the customer cannot care less if the program get 99% or >>>>99.1% against him. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>> >>> No >>> >>> You do not and cannot know what "the customer" cares about. You can only speak >>> for yourself. Do you really think all the tournament players/corr players care >>> about machine vs machine games? Can you even imagine that they just *might* be >>> interested in ideas from a chessprogram that they can use in games vs other >>> humans? At least this is a possibility - yes? >> >>If a program is better then it gives better ideas. >>If a program is not better against other programs then I do not expect it to >>give better ideas for correspondence games when the opponent can use other >>programs. >> >>> Speaking for myself, I welcome this development, i.e. making the programs play >>> more "humanlike" chess (without the human tactical errors of course). Junior >>> is very interesting here - giving up material in cramped positions in order >>> to free the game etc. >>> >>> /S >> >>I did not talk against sacrificing material and I think that it can help >>in comp-comp games(Junior improves in the ssdf list relative to previous >>versions). >> >>Uri > > > No, you spoke about what "the customer" cares or doesn't care about. As if > you really could know...Or have you made any marketing research in this > area? CB goes for showing the world that their products can level up to the > best players in matches (so there must be some value there for all the > tournament players around, yes? - that's the idea.) I have no doubt about > that the CB-people know what they are doing, in order to increase sales. > I also remember a wellknown name from CB, calling the people in this forum > "just a bunch of computerchess freaks", so I don't think they care much > about engine-engine games - except of leading the SSDF-list with some of > their products. Looks like the value of winning the Wch of computerchess > has decreased quite a bit too. (Just a personal reflection though.) > > /S First of all, "most people" do not care at all about chess and don't even think about chess computers. Of those who do care about chess, only a very small subset are "CCC types." Nevertheless, my guess is that every chess enthusiast or chess player who can afford it will have some sort of chess computer, usually a PC with a chess engine. I live in the USA so cannot say how common computers are outside the USA. Presumably, computers are commonplace in the more affluent countries, especially in Europe. Generally, one might expect chess people to try to determine "which is the highest rated chess engine?" and purchase the best. On the other hand, in the USA it is extremely easy to find and purchase Chessmaster 9000, which is plenty good enough for most everybody. The internet is also a good place for people who are too frugal, cheap, or poor to spend the few dollars needed to get the best. SSDF is the only rating organization with any credibility. I bought Shredder only because it made it to the top of the SSDF rating list. Maybe I'm typical? Bob D.
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.