Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 17:10:55 02/13/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2004 at 19:54:47, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 13, 2004 at 19:49:22, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On February 13, 2004 at 11:22:45, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>On February 13, 2004 at 10:13:26, Peter Fendrich wrote: >>> >>>>On February 13, 2004 at 00:28:13, Paul Doire wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi All, >>>>> >>>>>I am interested in knowing the strengths of all who post here. >>>>>Whether it is USCF or FIDE.To import chess knowledge into chess programs >>>>>seems to require the programmer to be strong or at minimum, their resources to >>>>>be strong. Who dares to tell...and dares to tell of those who will not tell. >>>>>Some human analysis we see would carry more weight knowing the strength of the >>>>>analyst. Do you dare to tell? >>>>> >>>>>Regards, >>>>>Paul >>>> >>>>I'm quite convinced that the correlation between being a strong chess player and >>>>a strong chess programmer is not very high. It's far more important to be a good >>>>programmer than a good chess player in order to produce a strong chess program. >>>>Of course the programmer must have rather good knowledge about different chess >>>>elements but that is not at all the same as being strong in OTB play. I even >>>>believe that a very strong OTB player might have some troubles to lower his >>>>level of play to the level of an evaluation function in a chess program... >>>>/Peter >>> >>> Hi Peter >>> I think you are just right ... in particular as far as your last >>> sentence is concerned. And furthermore: a very strong OTB player >>> would most probably be have the tendency to write a [too] perfect >>> chess program and this does not work. >>> Kurt > >But then again, Hans Berliner did pretty well. >Chris Whittington is a pretty good chess player, as well as Vincent. >Both of them have produced chess programs of commercial grade. > >Considering the hundreds of people who have tried to write a chess program, I >think that the data says it is helpful to know a lot about chess. > >Kind of common sense when you think about it. > >Of course, the intersection of chess knowledge and programming knowledge is what >is going to count the most. And I also think that you can transplant the >information for either skill from books, but that would not work as well as just >knowing it to start with. > >Dr. Hyatt is a pretty fair chess player as I recall (about 2000 I think). No way - he never claimed that! This is a bit too high. Unless the US numbers are 150 or 100 higher than FIDE. :) Rolf > >I think that some of the other chess programmers are also likely to be fairly >strong. > >I suspect that there are no chess programs in the top 25 with a programmer who's >Elo would be under 1000 if carefully measured. If nothing else, writing a chess >program will teach you to be a better chess player. You have to learn >structural things and tactical things to write a decent program. > >Similarly, I suspect that a genius chess player who can't program a lick will >also have a very hard time to come up with something decent. > >Generally speaking, the really good chess programmers tend to be exceptionally >smart people. That sort of person tends to be above average at anything mental >that they try.
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.