Author: David Blackman
Date: 01:14:22 04/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 12, 2000 at 08:40:55, blass uri wrote: >On April 11, 2000 at 05:12:28, David Blackman wrote: > >>On April 11, 2000 at 00:44:34, Georg Langrath wrote: >> >>>1n 1980 a compterprogram had about 1300 ELO-ratimg. >> >>Chess 4.7 was probably around 2000 rating before 1980. 1300 might be about right >>for the best microcomputer programs in 1980. (That's 1300 by 1980 standards. I >>think the average 1000 player today should beat any microcomputer program from >>1980). > >There are no 1000 players in Israel because the minimal rating is 1300 > >I remember programs like sargonII(I think it was available near 1980) >and my impression is that it can win easily the 1000 personalities of >chessmaster6000. There are players rated at 1000 (and much lower) in Australia, and in many ways they are actually quite good players. Most of the 1000 rated players rarely make one move blunders, know the easy endgame checkmates, and can spot elementary tactics like forks, pins and two move checkmates (both moves check) most of the time. In positions with no obvious tactics they will usually adopt some kind of positive plan, although not usually a very sophisticated one. They rarely make wild sacrifices unless there is lots of obvious compensation. Their endgames are weak, but not as weak as the microcomputer programs of 1980. At 2000 and above, Australian ratings are roughly in line with FIDE and USCF. At 1000, i'm not sure. I did play through a couple of games from Silman's "The Amateur's Mind" by very low rated players and thought they played about as well as Australians of the same rating. >I guess the best programs of 1980 could have rating of something like 1600-1700 > >I do not understand why do you assume that players with rating of 1000 are today >better than they were in 1980. My rating is about 1600 now. I have a good idea of the strength of the best 1980 microcomputers, and i can crush them tactically, or positionally, or just do nothing and wait for them to self-destruct in the endgame. I have played against Sargon (probably a later version) and a couple of dedicated machines that were probably introduced about 1980. The best mainframe programs of the time were much better. I think i would have very little chance against the Northwestern Chess program, or Duchess for instance. (I haven't played against the old mainframes, except a couple of quick games against MacHack. But i have played through their games from Frey's book. Not that impressive by modern standards, but certainly strong enough to beat me most of the time.)
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.