Author: stuart taylor
Date: 16:37:08 07/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2000 at 11:03:18, Timothy J. Frohlick wrote: >On July 01, 2000 at 03:57:00, Jerry Adams wrote: > >> >> The Best Software on the best machines are not playing grandmanster level >>chess. Or should I say that Rebel century is an exception? Generally Software >>Programs in my opinion are not demonstrationing grandmaster results? I mean at >>40\2hrs or am I mistaken? > >Mr. Adams, > >I think that a Dr. Hyatt is pretty competent to make that assertion. He has >been doing this computer chess programming for over a quarter of a century. He >also knows about grandmaster level play. The machines just don't have a clue in >complex positions. They will get better. In five to seven years we will have 12 >teraflop home workstations and 8 man tablebase chess programs with the >executable portions over 2 gigabytes in length. That should give the programs >enough simulation sophistication. > >But who is in a hurry. I don't believe that the earth will end in 2012 AD. > > > > >Tim Frohlick Who's in a hurry? I, for sure. I only wanted a simple, but true strong GM in machine form, so I can practise against and learn from it, and understand all the marvels of chess, before I have to give up chess completely, as I have other things to spend my time and interest on. But I'm just stranded in mid-air! With books, you can't really check things out, and the authors are often wrong, and GMs or even any humans are not always available, certainly not according to my convenience. And software, while able to terrorize almost anyone, still doesn't yet enlighten me in the ways that I'm seeking. 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.