Author: James Robertson
Date: 23:36:41 07/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2000 at 00:34:08, blass uri wrote: >On July 14, 2000 at 22:42:33, James Robertson wrote: > >>On July 14, 2000 at 19:22:16, Drazen Marovic wrote: >> >>>On July 14, 2000 at 19:00:32, Mogens Larsen wrote: >>> >>>>On July 14, 2000 at 18:40:10, Drazen Marovic wrote: >>>> >>>>> Scientifically is a comp GM strength? According to some here no, though i'm >>>>>not convinced of that oppinion either. >>>> >>>>Science has nothing to do with opinion. >>> >>>Apparently reading has nothing to do with understanding either! It is an >>>oppinion currently as to whether their is enough evidence to say scientifically >>>if a comp is GM strength. Further again this term of "GM strength" Does it >>>merely mean a statistical result or is it really more substantive to refer to >>>qaulity of play! If your average bootom of the barrel 2500 GM played in 3 round >>>robin 10 game events with Kasparov anand And Kramnik The bottom of the barrel >>>2500 GM would probably most likely not get his GM Norm much less get the 3 >>>required. That would not necessarily mean that he didn't demonstrate "GM >>>strength" play. Geesh the current world champion is barely going to get a GM >>>norm in Dortmund and Kasparov isn't even there! >> >>Nisipeanu's brief flash across the chess scene last year by overcoming many >>strong players at Las Vegas suggested he was of much greater than >2700 strength >>(after 10 odd games or so). But that impressive performance turned out to be >>fluke, and nothing more. >> >>The only way to gauge his "true" srength (or close to it) was to look at scores >>of his games, and they lead to a very different conclusion. >> >>Another example: P.Conners in his latest tournament had a TPR higher than what >>Junior had earned, and after more rounds! Unfortunately for P.Conners, two games >>dropped it's TPR to less than 2550. Amazing how things can turn around in mere >>hours.... >> >>Take another example: poor Luke McShane. After 9 games in Lippstadt, you would >>think he was the most terrible player in history to play in an international >>tournament. However, it is better not to write him off, as looking at the "big" >>picture (dozens and dozens of games by him) tells of high IM strength. >> >>Look at the TPR difference between Fritz's performance at the Isreali League >>(sub 2450!!!!) and at the Dutch Championship! Obviously, the few games played at >>either event is not enough to say anything susbtantial about Fritz's "true" >>strength. > >I believe that the reason that Fritz failed in the Israeli league is the fact >that the teams had the right to choose the player to play against the computer. > >I believe that we should count only tournaments when everyone has to play >everyone and not tournament that humans created in order to humiliate the >computer and not in order to get information about the real strength of the >computer. > >Uri I disagree. It played those games against those players and had those results. If the programmer does not like the conditions of the tournament, play in a different one, as any human with the same problem would. James
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.