Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: New SSDF list

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 05:57:52 12/07/99

Go up one level in this thread


On December 07, 1999 at 07:50:10, Dave Gomboc wrote:

>On December 07, 1999 at 06:16:17, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>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!
>
>My memory -- which isn't infallible -- suggests to me that GM Soltis made this
>comment about the difference between GMs and national masters.

Soltis is a fool then who didn't do any research.

I'm outsearching 90% of all gms in Netherlands bigtime tactical.
i'm just 2233 and i lose chanceless from most of them, except in blitz...

>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.