Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 11:40:19 09/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 1999 at 13:57:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >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. > >don't dump your old opinion just yet. I have been saying 2450. Enrique just >said that after 10 games, 2480 is the tpr. And a GM rating is 2500. This is >still _very_ close.. and more games will help. In yesterday's game I thought >the GM was going to win, as he had a very good position. The IM games were >all interesting... The GM never had a good position. This honor was for Rebel. >Only strange thing I saw was that the 'human team' seemed pretty anxious to >draw as their 'operator' was kibitzing draw requests several times as in "How >about we draw these last games, we want to go drink beer here..." And that was >a _real_ post from the human operator, although whether it was serious or not I >don't know. :) True. The GM was a tired of the draw ending. At fist I declined a draw offer. After the "beer" kibitz I thought why not take a beer myself. Now you see how serious these games are :) Ed >So it is still possible that a 2500+ rating will emerge, but after 10 games, it >is going to get harder and harder to pull this 2480 up... > > > > >> >>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. >> >> >> >>> >>>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.