Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 11:36:32 09/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 1999 at 12:19:14, Mark Young wrote: >On September 19, 1999 at 09:37:36, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>On September 18, 1999 at 17:44:11, Stephen A. Boak wrote: >> >>>By the way, the Rebel Century Performance Rating for the match today was: >>> >> 2553 << >>>which is certainly in the range of Grandmaster ratings. >> >>Rebel's TPR so far is roughly 2480, which is not GM level. Ten games are not >>enough to know much, but taking into consideration that Rebel is the program >>that scored the best in Aegon over the years, this tpr seems to indicate that >>programs do not reach GM level yet at slow time controls and against motivated >>GMs. One more thing: considering that Rebel played these games with a hardware >>much faster than a P200MMX, it seems clear that the SSDF list is quite inflated, >>maybe by some 150 points. >> >>I think that someone has been saying all this for years. Hi Bob! :) > >Yes, Bob has stood his ground in regards to saying that today’s programs are not >yet at grandmaster strength. Bob has given his reason why, and defended them >well. Bob has given a rating for the top programs of 2400 to 2450. In light of >the Rebel data this may also be too high for anything using a PII 400 or slower. > >I will be the first one to say Bob was right, and I was wrong, as I too thought >that today’s programs have broken the 2500 barrier. I am one how does not >disregard data, because it conflicts with my personal opinion. > >Before I can change my opinion I still need some data on Rebel 10.5. I am one >who does not assume Rebel 10.5 is stronger then say Rebel 10, just because it >has a higher version number on it. Nor do I assume Rebel 10.5 is as strong as >Fritz 5.32 or Hiarcs 7.32 or Chessmaster 6000 without any data to back it up. >Those questions must be answered first before we start claiming that the Rebel >10.5’s results playing against Grandmaster is a typical results with any of the >other top proven programs on the SSDF list. Over the years, Rebel performed better in Aegon than Morsch engines, the King, Hiarcs and all the others. I see no reason to believe that the situation is different now regarding program-human games. Enrique >>Looking at the few 40/2 games played so far by programs against strong human >>opponents, I wonder if results wouldn't be similar if played against 2300 >>people. The positional superiority of a 2300 player is still immense, and for >>them it might be a matter of avoiding tactics, as wise IMs and GMs do when >>playing computer programs. Maybe the Elo system works differently for programs? >> >>Aside form this, I don't think it makes sense to use the same opening book in >>comp-comp and in human-comp games. It is quite absurd to play openings that lead >>to positional games, where programs are quite dumb, and this is happening too >>often. Is it not a better idea to build a gambit-like book that tries to open >>the game and play tactics? Same for playing style. A program can afford to play >>the Orthodox against another program, because neither will understand a thing, >>but against a strong human player it's a mistake. Look, for instance, at Rebel-2 >>yesterday. >> >>Enrique
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.