Author: Uri Blass
Date: 23:42:16 09/24/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 25, 2004 at 02:36:28, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 25, 2004 at 02:09:20, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>On September 24, 2004 at 07:43:57, Joachim Rang wrote: >> >>>On September 24, 2004 at 05:07:52, stuart taylor wrote: >>> >>>>On September 24, 2004 at 04:44:23, jim r uselton wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hello, I'm a newbie at computer chess and I have a question. How strong are the >>>>>programs you buy right off the shelf. The Fritz, the Shredder, etc., etc. >>>>> >>>>>Will they play at GM strength or do you need a strong player guiding and >>>>>controlling move selection? >>>> >>>>The top programs on normal PC's of today, will often beat a GM, perhaps even >>>>more often than not. If even a GM wants to have a fighting chance, he has to be >>>>very familiar with computer style chess. >>>> >>>>This does not mean that a GM doesn't understand better than a computer. Any GM >>>>SHOULD beat a computer in almost any game, but that is now very hard to >>>>actualize any more, so you might as well say that computers are equal to a >>>>strong GM, but in a certain way. >>>> >>>>I think that if any GM would analyze absolutely determined to win, like in >>>>correspondents chess, then he could win (or draw) almost any game off any >>>>computer, even if the computer was also left analyzing for that same amount of >>>>time. But the GM would have to work very very hard. >>>> >>>>S.Taylor >>> >>>exactly that kind of experiment is happening right now: >> >>GM = Fide-GM >>Arno Nickel is not a Fide-GM. >>So that experiment does not happen right now. >> >>Michael >> >>> >>>http://www.chessfriend.com >>> >>>Select "GM Nickel - Engines" in the Navigation. >>> >>>so far it seems an engine with a dedicated and decent (not top) computer >>>analyzing at CC-time-controls (several days per move) is playing on GM-Level in >>>Correspondence Chess too. >>> >>>Of course Arno Nickel did some minor mistakes but the match indicates that even >>>on CC it is nowadays very hard for a human to beat a computer. >> >>With the help of a computer it´s very easy. >> >>Michael > >If it is very easy then you could expect nickel to get 6-0 result or at least >5-1. >He is not a fide GM but he is also not a weak chess player. > >There is a difference between claiming that very strong players can do it with >the help of computer(and even this was not proved) and claiming that it is very >easy. > >Note also that playing against a computer does not mean that you know the name >of your opponent and I doubt if you can beat a strong private program like >falcon at correspondence time control easily even if falcon is slightly weaker >than shredder. > >Uri I mentioned falcon because you did not claim that beating some public available programs in correspondence games is easy but that beating a computer is easy and if you know only that your opponent is a computer then you cannot know that it is not falcon and I doubt if knowing the name of the opponent in the beginning of the game will help you when the opponent is a private program. Uri
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.