Author: Albert Silver
Date: 06:21:49 07/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 14, 2000 at 09:09:02, Frank Wolf wrote:
>I read some of the posts on this question and sit back and laugh. Any real
>chess player who has played many games of chess with computers KNOWS THERE IS A
>BIG DIFFERENCE between chess programs with respect to human style. Talk of
>scientific proof of this is as silly as trying to prove that the great painters
>created works of art. THE COMPUTER STYLE IS TO PLAY TO OPEN THE POSITION AT
>EVERY OPPORTUNITY AND WIN BY BRUTE FORCE TACTICS ALONE! There is no attention
>paid to bad bishops, knight outposts, pawn structure chess, etc. Any class A or
>better player can spot the difference. Hiarcs 7.32 is more human-like than
>Junior 6, Junior 6 is more human-like than Fritz 6, Fritz 6 is more human-like
>than Fritz 5, Fritz 5 is more human-like than Fritz 4.
>
>It's great to have the programmers giving input on this site, but they should
>confine their comments to what they know, programming issues! When they start
>talking about chess, they look as silly as I would if I started giving posts
>about computer chess programming.
How strong are you and how much do you know about the programmers' chess
strength? Some are undoubtedly very weak, but some much less so. Bruce was of
OTB Expert strength (over 2000 in the US) at one point and Hyatt was playing at
2200 for a period. How about you?
BTW, on what do you base your assessment that Hiarcs 7.32 is more human-like
than Junior 6? It's possible, but I'd be curious to know what exactly made you
say that.
Albert Silver
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.