Author: José Antônio Fabiano Mendes
Date: 05:31:16 04/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 11, 2000 at 06:38:08, stuart taylor wrote: >On April 11, 2000 at 05:18:51, David Blackman wrote: > >>On April 10, 2000 at 21:57:05, stuart taylor wrote: >> >> >>>And anyway, the thrill of chess, I think, is that of wierd being proven right, >>>but I think that chess computers have already taught us that wierd normally >>>proves wrong. Does anyone think that there still exists such a deep >>>wierdness that would yet baffle the top humans, and that computers will unlock >>>it? >> >>Yes. Look at some of the weirdness found by endgame tablebases. There are >>positions there where the winning plan appears to be impossible for IMs and GMs >>to understand. I am sure that even stranger stuff will emerge in middlegames >>when computers learn to play them much better than GMs do. I think this will >>happen in the next 5 to 10 years. > >How many people beleive that? I would for sure be looking forward to it! >S.Taylor As a matter of fact,GM Yasser Seirawan has already made that point, during the Kasparov-Deeper Blue match.He said that what is valid when you play chess looking four moves ahead[top humans] can be wrong when you play looking ten moves ahead[Deeper Blue], and vice versa. He even asked,is there any mistakes in chess? JAFM
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.