Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 13:03:41 12/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 05, 1999 at 11:08:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 05, 1999 at 10:35:14, Tom Amburn wrote: > >>On December 05, 1999 at 10:10:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 05, 1999 at 05:18:40, Bertil Eklund wrote: >>> >>>>On December 05, 1999 at 01:02:14, Charles Unruh wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 04, 1999 at 18:41:53, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 04, 1999 at 17:07:23, John Warfield wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On December 04, 1999 at 16:40:02, Charles Unruh wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>How much does it take to show blind men that Comps are GM strength. A program >>>>>>>>beats a GM, draws several more, then beats lithuanian national team, Draws a >>>>>>>>40/2 with Anand and there are people here who want to make out that it's hardly >>>>>>>>USCF master strength!!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I agree!! And this kind of thinking is coming from people who are soppose to >>>>>>>be so smart??? One man holds this entire newsgroup hostage, if that man were to >>>>>>>change his mind tommorow about the GM issue then the whole group would follow, >>>>>>>mindless idiots. >>>>>> >>>>>>For every game you show me where the program beat the GM, I will show you >>>>>>another one where an under 2300 beat the program. Go look at the Aegon games, >>>>>>for instance. >>>>>> >>>>>>Signed: a blind man and mindless idiot. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>How many years and computer generations ago was Aegon? What you might want to >>>>>show me is how many masters or Even IMs could draw ANAND in a 40/2, beat the >>>>>lithuanian nat'l team, beat GM sherbakov, Draw 2593 Alexander Baburin, Be called >>>>>a GM strength by Larry Kaufman, all in a matter of a few months. If you could >>>>>find one, there isn't a soul alive that would say he was lucky as opposed to GM >>>>>strength. >>>> >>>>Hi! >>>> >>>>Remember that Rebel have performed this good in match-play, so you can probably >>>>add 50-150 elo in tournament-play without increments. Strangely most >>>>commentators have simply "forgotten" all about this. >>>> >>>>Regards Bertil SSDF >>> >>> >>>I disagree. What you say is "normally" true. But it is pretty obvious that >>>the GM players (excepting maybe Rhode) are _not_ preparing for Rebel in any >>>serious way. Notice how Kasparov prepared unorthodox openings against DB. >>>Including game 6 where it has become pretty obvious that rather than being a >>>finger-slip, it was a prepared 'trap' that worked against his test opponents >>>(ie Fritz) but which failed badly vs DB. Notice how the other GM players have >>>been playing 'normal openings' and letting the position open up where the >>>computer is at its best. >>> >>>In normal match-play, I'd say you are right. But so far, the GM players have >>>played just as they would in a tournament, where Rebel was an anonymous entrant. >>> >>>IMHO of course.. >> >> >> Certainly you don't think that the grandmasters are not preparring for rebel?? >>You don't think that they have a copy of rebel century themselves? With 500 >>dollars on the line, and the fact that rebel has beaten a grandmaster and drawn >>five others you don't think they would take the time to prepare?? Think of the >>tremendous advantage you would have if you had the opportunity to Play against >>Your human opponent, the night before the tournament. Also they have got to be >>atleast looking at the games rebel has played against the other GM's. A >>grandmaster can learn much more than the average person just looking at one >>game! Think what they can do with 15. > > >No I don't think they are preparing seriously as they would in a match against >a human. The games speak for themselves. Sacrificial lines. Wide open lines. >Only Rhode went for the normal strangle-hold on the position. > >I agree that they can learn a lot. I just don't believe they are ready to >accept that they _must_ do this to avoid getting into huge tactical >difficulties. Once they accept it, things will get more interesting. I play >a _lot_ of GM players on ICC. Only one plays anti-computer. He has _far_ >better results than anyone else. Kotronias tried some open lines against >Crafty last night and won 2 and lost 11 in 5 3 blitz. cptnbluebear doesn't >win a lot, but he draws a bunch. But he plays differently... aiming at the >computer's weaknesses, _not_ its strength... If they don't, they don't. Maybe some never will. Dave
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.