Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 03:16:17 12/07/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 05, 1999 at 20:33:46, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On December 05, 1999 at 20:03:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On December 05, 1999 at 13:30:52, Albert Silver wrote: >> >>>On December 05, 1999 at 12:49:48, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>>>On November 30, 1999 at 01:32:41, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 29, 1999 at 09:10:26, Albert Silver wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Guadeloupe isn't exactly a hotbed for strong chess players. I'm not sure how >>>>>>much he can learn from such games. >>>>>> >>>>>> Albert Silver >>>>> >>>>>I must concur, but am also compelled to comment that Christophe's war chest of >>>>>386s isn't exactly a hotbed of speed either. :) >>>>> >>>>>Dave >>>> >>>> >>>>That's exactly the point. Using a 386sx-20MHz again and again against players >>>>that understand where the weaknesses of the program are is a terrible test, >>>>believe me. >>>> >>>>For years, they wanted to play against Chess Tiger because it was fun to beat >>>>"the" computer. >>>> >>>>Tiger had no learning, and usually the same player tried to play the same >>>>unsound king attack over and over until he won. Usually it took several trials >>>>because the human player would do a tactical mistake. I did not prevent them >>>>from doing so. >>>> >>>>I have learned a lot with this. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Christophe >>> >>>I understand, and this brings to mind Ed's comment sometime ago in which he >>>explained how hard it was nowadays to see where and when Rebel was improving or >>>not, simply due to the depth and strength of the program. Naturally, it is much >>>easier to see what it is doing wrong at 6-7 plies than 11-12, nevertheless the >>>difference between a 2000 rated player and an GM rated 2500 is not merely one of >>>depth of calculation. Naturally, the GM is calculating far deeper, but there is >>>more involved. Suppose your program is getting 6-7 plies in a long game on your >>>386 and as such you have really maximized the knowledge and performance >>>according to what you have available. All the same, there are probably certain >>>things that simply cannot be done on a 386 that could be implemented on a more >>>powerful computer, because that more powerful computer has an edge that goes >>>beyond merely doing the same thing the 386 does but faster. This is why it is >>>impossible to properly compare programs like DB or Cray Blitz with other PC >>>programs. That is why comments like "if Hiarcs ran on a Cray it would be >>>stronger than Cray Blitz" have no meaning, as the program is inseparable from >>>the hardware. I think that as hardware develops, new things are possible in >>>programs that weren't possible in the past, but at the same time these newer >>>generation programs won't be retro-compatible, because what they do is only >>>possible with this new hardware. >> >>I'm seeing a big piece of crap here already refuted by De Groot >>many tens of years ago. >> >>He investigated the difference between what we would call now >>2200 players and international masters, >>however at standards of these times it woudl be a comparision >>between IMs and GMs >> >>One of the questions of the investigation was: >>Do GMs see deeper? >> >>Answer: NO >> >>Do GMs calculate more lines? >> >>Answer: NO >> >>Please read some older JICCA's as well. >>to get JICCA: herik@cs.unimaas.nl and herik@cs.rulimburg.nl >> >>One of those email adresses is valid i forgot which one. >> >> >>> Albert Silver > >De Groot said this in 1965, but I've also read in more recent books that GMs >_do_ calculate deeper than lesser players *when the position requires it*. >So the issue is not completely clear-cut. let's not copare beginners with beginners, but let's compare GMs with masterclass players. I'm sure that i see deeper and analyze more moves than someone who just starts chess. That's not an issue. Compare the right guys with the right guys! >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.