Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:58:39 02/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 14, 2000 at 13:15:27, blass uri wrote: >On February 14, 2000 at 11:33:20, Bas Hamstra wrote: > >>On February 14, 2000 at 10:49:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On February 14, 2000 at 09:49:53, Bas Hamstra wrote: >>> >>>>On February 13, 2000 at 23:05:27, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 13, 2000 at 20:57:12, Bradley Woodward wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On February 13, 2000 at 17:48:35, John Kilkenny wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> No attack, Just answr the question dude. His name is brought up because he >>>>>>>is the most ardent supporter of the anti comp GM campaign. Also in the minds of >>>>>>>many, he holds sway over the minds of the uneducated bretheren of chess. We >>>>>>>fight for the release of those minds :). >>>>>> >>>>>>I just had a look at the 'best c' list on ICC. That's the list that shows the >>>>>>top 20 human and computer players. Out of the 20 in the blitz list, only three >>>>>>are computers. This is a big difference from a while ago. Ferret plows in at >>>>>>#2, throwing my otherwards cool point into a spin. But you get that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I believe that had ferret been active over the past few months, its rating >>>>>would have dropped significantly as well. I think it might be the best thing >>>>>on ICC, but there are a lot of new players there, using faster and faster >>>>>hardware, with strong programs. None of us are +400 over the commercial >>>>>programs, even with a fairly significant hardware advantage. This 'advantage' >>>>>is almost gone now, with the super-G lonnies has actually being faster than my >>>>>quad xeon by 30% (factoring in SMP overhead). >>>> >>>>Seems to me that GMs are winning back some ground. There was a time computers >>>>nearly "owned" blitz. Computers have gone a good deal faster/stronger since >>>>then, but and still only 3 C's in the top 20 Blitz? In a while there will be no >>>>C at all :-) And that's Blitz... >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Shhh... do you want the 'computers are unbeatable GM players' group on your >>>case too? :) >> >>Wouldn't bother me at all :) >> >>But I've SEEN things they people wouldn't believe... (from "The bladerunner") >> >>But seriously I have seen a GM tear a fast Crafty completely apart in a 5 0 game >>which was *extremely* tactical. Hanging pieces everywhere, both kings unsafe and >>the GM came out winning. Unbelievable. How in the world can they oversee such a >>battlefield in 1 second...? If they can do *that* in a 5 0 game... > >Maybe it was an home preperation when the GM saw everything before the game. >It is also possible that the GM was lucky and the moves that he guessed to be >the best were really the best moves. > >Everything can happen in one game and I will not be surprised if a GM wins one >tactical game at 1/0 time control against crafty. > >The question is about a match of many games > >Uri I have seen crafty lose 4 game matches with GM players. It might win 9 of every 10 such matches, but losses happen. I have seen _all_ programs lose to GM players at blitz on ICC. I have seen all automated programs lose at 1 0 on ICC. Not regularly, but enough that I would _never_ bet money on a 5 game match, under any circumstances, any program, any hardware.
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.