Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 15:19:23 05/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 16, 2000 at 16:38:27, pete wrote: >On May 16, 2000 at 13:27:29, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >>On May 16, 2000 at 13:18:34, Michel Langeveld wrote: >> >>>So why not a forklift truck on a World Championship of weightlifting. >> >>Hi Michel: >>Perhaps yours is not the perfect example. Machine that lift weights are from the >>beginning stronger than even Hercules. No mistery to solve. Is not the same with >>chess programs: in fact the idea of making them play the best human player is >>precisely to see how strong they are. Besides some improvement of human playing >>could emerge from this kind of competition. There is plenty of room for >>dicoveries and a challenge to the usual way we play chess. Many discoveries in >>the realms of openning, perhaps. Nothing of that is like competing againts a >>machine that just lift something. Different would be or will be the day there is >>no doubt at all and just any top program can defeat any top human player. But >>for now is not so and so we are going to lose a source of excitment and eventual >>progress both for programmers and human players. But in any case I agree this is >>a debatable point. >>Fernando > >Maybe it is the wrong forum to discuss this but in fact I completely agree to >your opinion and want to add a few additional aspects. > >Chess has _often_ been declared dead . > >Two probably most well-known examples are the roaring 20s when most GMs seemed >to agree about the "Draw Death" of chess meaning that two players of reasonable >strength will always be able to get a draw whenever they liked as chess was more >or less solved . > >Then came Aljechin ... > >If I remember it right in 1970 Bobby Fisher ( after at last researching some >other openings than Sozin , King's Indian and the Ruy and trying things like the >Evan's , King's gambit at the Olympiad ) said something like :" There are no >surprises anymore , no odd gambits anymore , nothing new under the sun . " > >Then look at Kasparov's performance last year !! Look at all the new openings >found being playable and promising since 1970 ! > >How much is the _human_ progress since 1960 ? since 1980 ? since 1990 ? Although >there might be a rating inflation nobody can safely deny that there _has_ been >progress. > >And what has this to do with computerchess ? > >Well : imagine a young Russian IM training KRPKR : maybe he sits there studying >with a chessprogram and the Nalimov tablebases : likely ? I think : yes . > >Some years ago there was a match between Kasparov and the Swiss national team >and I remember him doing the preparation with some Chessbase Database in >incredible speed learning about the opponents and got nearly all of them at >their weaknesses . > >It is also well-known that GMs are training against chessprograms nowadays . > >What will this bring ? I suspect very much that in the near future we will see >humans playing with an tactical accuracy beyond belief . > >Even nowadays it has become very difficult to find a tactical mistake in a GM >game ; blunders _do_ happen . but compair this with an analysis on famous >tournaments like Karlsbad 1929 . > >Computers will rule tactics soon ( if they not already do ) but I think people >who expect computers will be completely unbeatable in 5 years underestimate the >_human_ mind . I agree 100 per cent. Fernando
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.