Author: Djordje Vidanovic
Date: 10:52:35 05/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2000 at 13:21:02, Ed Schröder wrote: >On May 19, 2000 at 11:00:07, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: > >>On May 19, 2000 at 10:46:36, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >> >>>On May 19, 2000 at 10:37:52, Albert Silver wrote: >>> >>>>On May 19, 2000 at 09:29:52, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>>> >>>>Van der Wiel could give lessons on anti-computer strategy. Of course he is a >>>>VERY old hand at it, and probably the most experienced of all the players in the >>>>tournament. Made it look simple. >>>> >>>> Albert Silver >>> >>>True, and also true for Grooten and van Wely. Back to the old question: how >>>strong are today's programs? It depends on how the opponent plays against them: >>>in the van der Wiel, van Wely and Grooten way, or in the (foolish) style of van >>>den Doel and de Vreugt. >>> >>>Overall, Fritz scored very well, with 5 points out of 9 and almost a GM norm. By >>>the way, I think that Fritz running on a P300 would have lost and won the same >>>games. >>> >>>Enrique >> >>I've just come back and had a look at the game. Another effortless win by a >>human. Fritz simply had no idea what was going on. The old Levy dictum about >>doing nothing but doing it carefully was effective again... Yes, Enrique, the >>key question is just how strong are today's programs. >> >>I agree about Fritz's scoring well (5/9), but what if the other humans had >>played the slow and careful game, instead of seeking skirmish? Hmmm. All I >>know for sure is that Fritz is a great blitzer, but not a great tournamenent >>player, yet :) > >What about GM Jan Timman? He is a great player but famous for making >blunders in won positions. Computers have their own weaknesses. Still >they score very high TPR's these days. They do it in their own way and >we don't question the rating of Jan Timman do we? > >Just making a point... > >Ed > > >>*** Djordje Hello Ed, Yes, you made a point alright. You know, problem is, whenever I analyse games that comps played against highly rated humans, that I inevitably end up somewhat disappointed. The same happened with Rebel for instance. After a very nice game it would play a pale strategic game and lose easily... My problem arises whenever I compare my expectations based on blitz games and computers' performances against humans at tournament time controls. The other day it was another top program that I had play against an IM friend at G/60. I was so sure that the program would win, as it had done so in G/5 many times, that I wagered a bet (dinner, what else?) and lost. However, the loss was not what hurt, but the way it lost. No plan, no attack, no counterattack. Just waiting for slaughter. Like a lamb. So I had yet another moment of sobering up. Still I believe that you made a point :) *** Djordje
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.