Author: Graham Laight
Date: 05:04:38 12/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 1999 at 07:08:38, Albert Silver wrote: >>A lot of GMs strongly criticised much of DB's play against GK - often using >>phrases like "that move was truly ugly", thus implying that to be a good move, a >>move has to "look attractive" - but in the end DB came away with the points. > >Highly debatable. The reason DB didn't convince GMs of being superior, is >because it was inferior in most games. For whatever reasons Kasparov was not >able to convert these positions, but the inferior positions were due to inferior >positional play. Like everyone else, I agree that 6 games under conditions that favoured the computer (although Gary was so confident that he did agree to the terms) does not make a strong case. Having said that, look what you have effectively just said (with a bit extra added by myself for good measure!): * GK's superior positional play gave him the advantage in four of the games * DB achieved the advantage in 2 of the games * GK converted 1 game in which he had the advantage * DB converted both the games in which it had the advantage From this, I draw a conclusion (in computer chess, if one wishes to draw conclusions, one often has to base them on flimsy evidence). The conclusion is that positional advantage is not necessarily the most important factor in determining who will win a chess game. Albert also stated that he is able to beat all the chess programs he possesses - which I think includes the new Rebel Tiger. However, it's not good enough to beat them in the comfort of one's home. If he played them under competitive conditions, some extra considerations would come into play: * Some of the evaluation factors would be changed, so that he may not be able to predict their moves so accurately * The whole thing, from opening books to evaluation factors could be tuned to produce an optimum game against HIM. This is the reality that GK faced against DB in May '97. If anti-computer chess is alive and well, why did IM Dan Hergot lose to Hiarcs in early '97 - to what is now an old version of Hiarcs on old hardware? And why did GM Ruslan Scherbakov lose to Rebel Century? And why did the computers beat the humans overall at the last Aegon tournament (1997)? -g
This page took 0.01 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.