Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 17:17:36 06/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 2000 at 18:51:10, Hans Gerber wrote: [snip] >Yes, in general. But in certain special positions programs make big mistakes. [snip again] >Now we have the problem of sense. In my opinion it does not make sense if we >compared human beginners with good computer programs. Let us compare masters and >machines since the claim is that machines could at least play like a master. In >my opinion this is not true. For the reason that machines still have too many >weaknesses in certain positions. For positional moves, gambit sort of moves, sacrifices, and things of that nature, computers often play like a 1400 player. For tactical moves, computers play like a 2800 player. I have seen computers do horrible, ridiculous gaffes in the early endgame that anyone who has played one hundred games would not make. But in a 50 move game the odds that somewhere, sometime you won't see a deep snare are very high. That's why the computers play so well. They are the best "piece snackers" around. If there is a way to spear something hidden deeply away somewhere, they will unerringly find it. I think if the GM's learned how to play anti-computer it would shave two or three hundred points off the computer ratings.
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.