Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 23:27:31 06/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 17, 2000 at 01:06:48, Adrien Regimbald wrote: >Hi, > >I've noticed that nobody has really looked at the issue of whether it is a good >idea for a GM to play a computer in purely long term practical considerations. > >Eventually, just simply by advances in CPU speed, one can presume that computers >will reach a point where they can beat the GMs. > >With this in mind - it might not be a good long term idea to play the computers >from the GM's perspective. Right now, most of the tournaments where computers >get a chance to play the GMs are only possible by good sponsorship to encourage >the GMs to play. Do you think that the companies manufacturing computer >programs care at all about the GMs? No - they are in it for the money. Do you >think they will continue sponsoring tournaments even after their program >slaughters the best of GMs 100 times out of 100? The answer is simple - no. > >So the GMs will obviously not be able to rely on the companies advocating the >computers to sponsor them in the future. One then has to consider what will >happen to the other sponsors. I can't be sure about this, but I would imagine >that the other sponsors would probably be much less interested in sponsoring a >GM tournament when every player in the world has a home program which is >stronger than any of the GMs. > >I don't know if this is truly the reason that they don't wish to play, but it is >surely something to think about. > >Whatever the GMs' reasons - I would hope that we can be a little more >understanding of their plight. Even if the GMs are scared to play the machines, >I don't think we should be crucifying them for it. I think that all too often, >the attitude in this forum seems to be that the GMs are nothing more than guinea >pigs for our own amusement. > >Perhaps if we were a little more understanding of the GMs, and we stopped >approaching the issue like bagging another trophy for computer chess rather than >a scientific effort to improve computer chess programs, maybe, just maybe, the >attitude among the GMs would change as well. > >Can you imagine the difference if instead of having this outlook "If I lose this >game, I'm out of the prize money, and I will be publically humiliated", that the >GMs had this outlook "I'm participating in an effort to advance computer chess, >which could end up having many positive benefits" ? > >Just some food for thought. > > >Regards, >Adrien. About the future: at the moment it still is a kind of shame to lose from a computer. This makes a GM careful to play. However things are changing rapidly. Soon there will be a time that GM's will consider it as a big thing to win from a computer since there is only to win and nothing to lose. Then we see the opposite happen: big headers in magazines, "GM wins from computer XXX", the GM on his home page he has beaten the monster, postings in CCC will drop with 35% because it is no news anymore to win from a GM, instead it will be only news if a computer loses. How do you think producers will feel then? :) Ed
This page took 0.01 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.