Author: Howard Exner
Date: 22:36:38 01/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 1999 at 01:17:32, Howard Exner wrote: >On January 25, 1999 at 19:19:22, Reynolds Takata wrote: > >>On January 25, 1999 at 18:36:40, Howard Exner wrote: >> >>>On January 25, 1999 at 15:59:07, James Robertson wrote: >>> >>>>On January 25, 1999 at 14:04:39, Reynolds Takata wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>A few months ago, a poster named Gram or Graham can't remember, said that Fritz >>>>>5.32 playing anonymously could score the GM norm, well it turns out he was >>>>>right. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Not necessarily. Humans play a lot of moves against other humans they would >>>>*never* play against a computer. >>> >>>I remember Shawn's thread and that was his point. That if the computer >>>had some disguise (human cheater) then humans would play it as if >>>they were playing a human. All the anti-computer play would not occur, >>>as you have just said. So the computer playing anonymously would give >>>the machine an advantage in the sense of stripping computer savy opponents >>>of their arsenal of tricks. >> >> >>I just got an email from Shaun about the post, he thanked me for posting it, but >>said that his real point was that Computers are Grandmaster "strength" against >>regular "human play", though against anti-computer play not necessarily so. He >>went on to say was that anti-computer play was a "sort" of cheating against >>computers. He gave an example of giving a weaker player(competent and strong >>still though) a detailed description of all of Deep Blues weakneses that might >>be garnered from a log of a 1000 DB vs DB games. Deep blue would have no option >>to change its nature or change as a human would. More to the point he said >>"imagine that the human cheater(disguised comp), not necessarily ina tournament >>sat down before 10 grandmasters for a 40/2 on ten different days(unbeknownst to >>the GM's), the comp might defeat all of the GM's or the majority. So how could >>one say that the comp isn't GM strength". What can be said is that in a tourney >>a computer is often at a disadvantage, because his opponent knows the computer, >>but the computer doesn't know anything about the opponent(a disparity). Both >>Chessbase(nixdorf classic), and Rebel(anand match) understood this, and >>attempted to make their programs play openings that their opponents had >>previously had difficulty with. The result of giving the comp knowledge of the >>specific opponent gave Fritz a HUGE success. I believe this is also one of the >>main reasons for Anands defeat in the blitz match. If not his defeat, at least >>his getting BLOWN OUT. I'm certain giving comps knowledge about how to avoid >>certain types of positions(which is already being done), will incerase comp vs >>human scores considerably(even though by my count they seem to be practically >>winning now anyway). All this is by the comp is an attempt to "Accentuate the >>possitives in their game" and cover up the weaknesses by playing for what they >>like. Humans do this everyday in chess. No one who hates open positions, being >>down material and attacking is going to play the Ruy Marshall. Hey i'm tired of >>writing :). >> >>R. Takata >>USCF Life Master > >Shawn's hypothetical, what if a person used a computer so as to make >the human opponents think that they were playing a oops meant human here not "computer" computer, has strangely >turned into a real event, as your initial thread has reminded us. Most humans >definitely adjust their style when they play against a computer. What was >the eventual performance rating of the cheater? Maybe the cheater will claim >he was abducted by Fritz in a kind of "Outer Limits" theme :) > >>> >>>>Imagine Tal sacrificing in a tournament filled >>>>with computers; an ugly sight. >>>> >>>>Also, we have no clue what the hardware was. >>> >>>Yes, that would be usefull info in knowing the hardware speed. >>>> >>>>James >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>The German Newsmagazine "Der Spiegel" today reports a funny story: Mr. >>>>>>Allwermann, an Elo 1925 amateur of age 55 has won a nine-round 2h/40 swiss >>>>>>tournament and achieved a performance of 2630. >>>>>> >>>>>>Organizers and competitors got somewhat suspicious when the guy announced a mate >>>>>>in eight in the decisive final round game against grandmaster Kalinichev! >>>>>> >>>>>>"Der Spiegel" writes that Mr. Allwermann's moves are reproducible with >>>>>>Fritz5.32. While nobody understands how he has done it, there are rumours that >>>>>>he formerly worked in the 'electronics business'. Moreover the German chess >>>>>>magazine "Schachmagazin 64" not only points out the fantastic attacking >>>>>>combinations but also some typical Fritz 'no-clue' moves like Bf4 in a closed >>>>>>French Winawer as White. >>>>>> >>>>>>Seems like we will need airport-type security checks in tournaments in the >>>>>>future. >>>>>> >>>>>>Jürgen
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.