Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: the "greatest achievement of any computer program in history"

Author: Tom Kerrigan

Date: 16:03:23 08/06/00

Go up one level in this thread


On August 06, 2000 at 06:01:21, blass uri wrote:

>On August 06, 2000 at 05:29:33, Adrien Regimbald wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>>Agreed, but certainly it will sell copies of Deep Junior, which is clearly what
>>>is intended by these statements.  For I can't figure out any other possible
>>>explanation for the claims I see.  I mean, clearly 50% against some of worlds
>>>best is not as good as +3 against the World Champion.  There is NO possible
>>
>>
>>I think that being able to beat so called "Anti computer chess experts"
>>regularly would be a much more tremendous feat.  I would rather see a program
>>which could perform at a "legitimate master level" than one that gets an overall
>>performance rating of 2700 or so against the cream of the crop.  By this I mean
>>that the computer wouldn't fall into draws with players rated at 1200 (yes, I've
>>seen some players rated that low manage to hold some of the best computer
>>programs around to draws, and not by any cheap opening trick either, just by
>>steering the game into certain types of positions)
>
>1200?
>
>The lowest rating in Israel is 1300 so there are no players with 1200 and the
>Israeli rating is similiar to the fide rating.
>
>If I use chessmaster personalities to see the meaning of 1200 then I can see
>that 1200 players do a lot of tactical mistakes and has no chance against the
>top programs.

Taking advantage of tactical mistakes doesn't always mean that you win the game.

Even if you're a rook up, a hopelessly blocked position will result in a draw.

I've seen weak players draw computers. Ratings don't really play a role in these
games.

-Tom



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.