Author: martin fierz
Date: 03:47:40 10/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 19, 2004 at 06:06:05, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On October 19, 2004 at 05:57:06, Vasik Rajlich wrote: > >[snip] > >>In a few years no humans will have a chance (under current rules). Computers >>still have huge strategic holes - there is a lot of progress still to be made. >>Chess is tactical enough that a 15-ply search compensates in practice for all >>sorts of strategic deficiency. It's hard to beat somebody who is stronger than >>you tactically. >> >>It's a sort of interesting accident that computer vs human is balanced at the >>moment. If the game was more tactical, humans would already be crushed and we >>would accept it as a matter of course. If it was more positional, humans would >>still be stronger, maybe much stronger. > >*agrees to everything* :) > >A game more tactical than Chess is Othello (also called Reversi) where humans >have no chance since many years. A game less tactical is Go, where the best >computers play like weak amateurs. is that so? isn't it just that the branching factor in othello is much smaller than in chess, while in go it is much larger? and another question: do you think if we were to reduce the tactical content of chess by removing the queens in the starting position, would the computers get much weaker? cheers martin >Personally I don't think it's very interesting to know whether computers get >stronger than humans five years ago, today or in five years (in chess). But I >seem to be in the minority here. > >Sargon
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.