Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:42:00 01/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 07, 2000 at 19:18:10, Chris Carson wrote: >On January 07, 2000 at 18:16:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 07, 2000 at 13:59:37, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>Bob, >>> >>>I know where you stand. :) 2450 to 2500 is a good number, >>>I completly agree with you and you have posted excellant >>>arguments and facts to support it (both now and in the past). :) >>> >>>I was not sure if Albert had a different line of reasoning. I >>>respect his views and was just curious. :) >>> >>>Best Regards, >>>Chris Carson >> >> >>The issue is 'what will a 2600 player do and what won't he do'. Today I >>watched Tiger vs Crafty where the game was very equal going into the endgame >>with several pieces left, the only difference is that crafty had a pawn majority >>that would turn into an outside (distant) passed pawn. The opponent gladly let >>Crafty trade into an ending that was absolutely dead won for Crafty. A 2600 >>player simply would _not_ do that, because it is a trivially won ending... >> >>That is the kind of thing a 2600 player won't do... and that is something that >>a 2600 player _will_ take advantage of, over and over, when he spots it. >> >>And that isn't picking on Tiger, for any reason other than it is the one at the >>top of the SSDF with a rating near 2700. You won't find _any_ 2700 player that >>will make a basic mistake like that. But you will find _lots_ of computers that >>can and will fall into it. > >Bob, > >IMHO: >2600 players make mistakes, 2700 players make mistakes, 2800 players >make mistakes (I think GK made some against DB). Sometimes stupid ones. >I have never seen any person play error free for extended periods of >time (person or machine). I am not skilled enough as >a chess player to point those out, but the colums of chess mags/books >are littered with them. If I get a chance to locate a mistake by >a top 50 player, I will post it (perhaps a GK vs DB, either match). :) > >I even think GK complained about not having access to DB games (the IBM >team saw this as an advantage in match play) to prepare with. GK thought >that preparation against the machine would help his performance MPR or >TPR or PR. :) > >I agree with your statements though. :) IMHO: Programs are likley to >make the same strategic error over and over. Learning solves some of this, >but not all. This is a major challenge for programmers and programs >and a useful tool for people to use against machines. >Adaptability is a huge hole in programs (among others). :) > >Am I adding anything here or just being stubborn? If I am not >adding anything, tell me and I will drop it. :) > >Best Regards, >Chris Carson Two points. I agree about the adaptability problem. It is a huge problem. As far as 2700 players making mistakes, I agree. But not terribly gross ones (very often). _NO_ GM would ever trade into a dead lost king and pawn ending, for example. They might underestimate an attack, or overlook an odd mate in 2 or 3, but they will not consistently trade into a lost ending. That is the difference, and the problem. One sort of problem: king and pawns and a couple of pieces vs king and pawns and a couple of pieces. The computer has pawns at (say) f7,g7 and h6, the human has pawns at (say) f4, g3 and h3. The computer plays g5. And creates a probably lost pawn ending (after fxg5, hxg5, white can make a passed pawn on the h-file, while blacks will be on the f-file, and with no pieces, white probably wins. A GM would simply not play g5, or else it would not trade pieces after doing so, knowing that the pieces can restrain the passer and maybe have a chance. It is the _kind_ of error. GMs overlook oddball tactics, to be sure. But they certainly don't overlook simple lost endgame positions. The computer, on the other hand, won't often overlook simple tactics, but some will blow the endgame above over and over and over.
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.