Author: Stephen Ham
Date: 14:23:49 04/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2004 at 16:15:03, Mark Young wrote: >On April 16, 2004 at 16:05:45, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>On April 16, 2004 at 15:09:01, Stephen Ham wrote: >> >>>On April 16, 2004 at 14:05:26, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>>On April 16, 2004 at 10:54:12, Stephen Ham wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 16, 2004 at 09:00:36, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>First it was Deep Fritz against Kramnik then Deep Junior versus Kasparov, >>>>>>nothing but to boring draw matches. It is about time for us to see the strongest >>>>>>chess program Shredder 8 accomplishing what Deep Blue did back in 1997 against >>>>>>Kasparov. >>>>>> >>>>>>Jorge >>>>> >>>>>Jorge, >>>>> >>>>>I think that you're forgetting that the strongest engine in engine versus engine >>>>>contests (Shredder 8) isn't, as a consequence, the strongest versus humans. >>>>>That's why Rebel probably has the best record against humans of any engine to >>>>>date. I've read that Crafty scores well against us too. >>>> >>>>This maybe correct...but I don't think so. More data needed. >>>> >>>>I am not sure your claim is correct that Rebel has the best record to date of >>>>any engine. I am sure Junior, Hiarcs, Chess Tiger, and the Fritz will argue this >>>>point with you. >>>> >>>>I am not sure what you mean by the best record against humans. >>>> >>>>Chess Tiger 14, Hiarcs 8, Junior 6, Fritz 8 have all had 2700+ PR playing >>>>against humans. >>>> >>>>Junior 8 and Deep Fritz 8 have a 2800+ PR playing humans. >>>> >>>>As far as I know Shredder 7.04 or Shredder 8. The top programs on the SSDF list >>>>don't have any GM games played to data. So to make the statement that: >>>> >>>>"the strongest engine in engine versus engine >>>>contests (Shredder 8) isn't, as a consequence, the strongest versus humans." >>>> >>>>This statement has no basis in fact. This is pure speculation. >>> >>>Not at all, Mark. Again, Jorge was writing about matches against the best >>>humans. Fritz and Junior and others have had their chances and the results were: >>>draws. This was the point of Jorge's post. >>> >>>Instead, the engines you wrote about above gained their successes in tournament >>>action. However, some of those engines failed in their match against Smirin. So >>>in the context of matches, Rebel won all of its matches I believe, including >>>those versus Anand and van Wely and other strong GM's. Since Rebel's victories >>>were several years ago, then one presumes that the latest version should prove >>>at least as strong against humans. >> >>This is completely wrong. >>Anand won the "match" against Rebel with 1.5-0.5. >> >>Van Wely-Rebel ended 2-2 > >You are correct.... about the wely-rebel match. I am also sure he was talking >about GM John van der Wiel vs Rebel match. But this makes Mr. Ham is wrong again >in this statement. > >"Rebel won all of its matches I believe, including >those versus Anand and van Wely and other strong GM's." > Gentlemen, It seems that my memory did err slightly. It was indeed van der Weil and not van Wely, that Rebel defeated. Nonetheless, here are the facts: Rebel defeated Yusupov Rebel defeated Anand - by the way, Rebel played on a standard PC of 1998, no special hardware Rebel defeated van der Wiel, a GM having success defeating other engines Rebel drew with van Wely. http://members.home.nl/matador/chess.htm Since Fritz and Junior played with special multiple processors, with each processor being faster than the single 1998-vintage PC that Rebel had when defeating Anand, then I think that Rebel's success is all the more amazing. Sure, some of the Anand match was played with short-time controls. But I suspect that if Rebel had the chances that Fritz and Junior were given (special hardware and special opening books, etc.) then I'd still put my money on Rebel. I respect that you disagree with me. So what? There's no need to make the disagreement so personal. Stephen
This page took 0.01 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.