Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Truly deserved computer ratings?

Author: stuart taylor

Date: 23:31:50 06/29/00

Go up one level in this thread


On June 29, 2000 at 16:28:54, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On June 29, 2000 at 04:04:49, stuart taylor wrote:
>>On June 28, 2000 at 01:56:53, David Blackman wrote:
>>>On June 27, 2000 at 00:32:15, stuart taylor wrote:
>>>>  Is it not true that human ratings are lower than computer ratings relative to
>>>>true standard of play due to the fact that humans make many blunders of the
>>>>nature that computers do not?
>>>
>>>Correct.
>>>
>>>It is also true that I make many blunders of the nature that Kasparov does not.
>>>This is the main reason that his rating is 1200 points higher than mine, IHMO,
>>>and if truly deserved ratings were used our ratings would actually be much
>>>closer :-)
>>
>>Yes. I know! It can get a little bit complicated.   But still, human vs. human
>>is very different to human vs. calculator.  The calculator simply does NOT make
>>any mistakes which it is not programed to make. All humans DO- in abundance!
>
>You are wrong.  Programs are full of bugs.  Opening books are full of bugs.
>Algorithms are deficient.  Eval functions are deficient.
>
>Look at some of the funny gaffes like immobilizing your own pieces that have
>been recently demonstrated.
>
>Computers make plenty of mistakes, *especially* positional ones.  Some of them
>are simply hilarious.

I'm talking about the type of mistake that after making, you have to just resign
immeadiately. I don't think the top commercial programmes ever do such mistakes.
e.g. to throw away a peice. Or even something near to that, is usually much more
serious (for the end result) than computer errors.
S.Taylor



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.