Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:11:27 10/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 12, 2004 at 13:11:27, Graham Laight wrote: >On October 12, 2004 at 13:07:22, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>On October 12, 2004 at 10:28:16, Graham Laight wrote: >> >>>Hydra seems to be a god-like system in its ability to pick out the profoundly >>>brilliant move. Is it available to play against online anywhere? If ever there >>>was a justification for charging a fee for a game of chess, then Hydra has it in >>>spades! In competition after competition, it just keeps on punching in those >>>brilliant performances. >>> >>>We have also known for many years that Fritz is outstanding - Franz and >>>Mattheius (sp?) have long had a subliminally fast system - but for the past >>>several years, they've also had a strategic system, with quite outstanding >>>positioning skills. For them to equal Hydra's Bilbao score with only a 1.9 GHz >>>processor represents consolidation of their position at the top of the >>>programmers' tree. >>> >>>Then we have Junior - which flopped. What was it doing in the computer team? It >>>was the only computer to get a negative score against the humans - and was well >>>short of what its team-mates achieved (see >>>http://www.ajedrezbilbao.com/cResultadosEN.htm). >>> >>>How does one explain such a poor performance by Junior, which had massively >>>superior hardware to Fritz? Should we ask the Junior programmers to forward >>>their program to to Franz Morsch for advice and improvement? >>> >> >>Reading comments like yours, I come to the conclusion that an Introduction to >>Statistics course should be made mandatory as a prerequisite for joining CCC... > >I obtained a university qualification in statistics 20 years ago (I did an >ancillary in statistics as part of my computing degree). > >-g You probably need a refresher course. :) I just picked four pennies out of my pocket and flipped each of them 4 times. Know what I found? One penny that will _only_ produce heads. It produced four heads in a row, and that is _clearly_ enough samples to say how it will do for longer tests, right? :) 3 draws and a loss against GM players is _not_ a bad result. If you think it is, you have a highly exaggerated opinion of how strong computers really are. Hint: "think lower". based on that at least 1/2 of the GM players that enter tournaments produce very "poor" results... > >>>-g
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.