Author: Harald Faber
Date: 05:42:12 04/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 07, 2000 at 06:54:39, Jeff Nouveau wrote: >>>>>So, I think we agree on the fact that we need 3 sets of rules for these 3 >>>>>disciplines. >>>>> >>>>>I sincerely think that we can find a set of rules that will permit comp-human >>>>>competition on fair basis. And I think we need it : many of us want to know :o) >>>>> >>>>>Jeff >>>> >>>>What are your suggested conditions? >>>>Should humans be allowed to use opening books? Why (not)? >>> >>>Many simple ideas have been suggested in this forum, and I think they are worth >>>experimenting : >>> >>>1-Use of database (only database, no engine of course ;o), >> >>For OTB play? I am not sure how big the influence of a large book is for the >>program and the human. I'd assume the human to really know his opening >>repertoire so that the benefit is not so big. > >I agree that the influence opening book is not that big. Let's say that it >compensate memory failure (it happens...). Maybe, I am not sure. >>>2-Incremental time control, >> >>No problem. >> >>>3-Maybe ending tablebases, if the computer have them. >>> >>>I don't think we need much more than that. With this kind of conditions, I'm >>>sure we respect everyone's work : player, programmer, opening book maker... >>> >>>What do you think ? >>> >>>Jeff >> >>I have come to no conclusion. >>Major point of course are the databases, opening and endgame. Computers can >>access them very easily. Humans also have their opening database / opening book >>in mind. It is smaller, no doubt. But would the human (IM/GM) profit from a real >>database instead of only relying on his memory? What about endgame databases? I >>think many humans are stronger in endgames than comps even with TBs. Humans know >>HOW to play pawn and rook plus pawn endings, assuming more than 2-3 pawns each >>side. On the other hand these TBs have surprised even John Nunn in some >>positions where humans with their knowledge mis-evaluated some positions. But >>how important are they for practical play? I don't know. >>And, finally, every opening book, no matter how large it is, has some holes in >>it. > >That's why I think that some experiments must be conducted : we don't thousands >of games, just one or two match to adjust the rules. > >Jeff Will be difficult because humans play different styles and have different kinds of preparation. But it might be worth a try.
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.