Author: Howard Exner
Date: 19:01:00 01/08/98
Go up one level in this thread
On January 08, 1998 at 12:05:31, Howard Exner wrote: >I reviewed the Aegon 1997 data again to determine how the newer PC >commercial units (at that time) did against the GM's and IM's. These >programs and results are as follows: Here is the corrected list: It now includes round 6 plus the results of Dick van Geet (an IM not mentioned in the IM profile from the Aegon site). So in total the results of 12 GM's are included and 11 IM's( the 10 in the IM profile plus Geet) Program GM IM Fritz .5-.5 .5-.5 Hiarcs 0-0 1-0 Shredder 0-1 1-1 Rebel 1-1 3.5-.5 MCPro 0-2 0-0 Genius 0-2 1-1 CM 5000 .5-.5 2-0 Nimzo 2-0 1.5-1.5 Chessica 0-1 2-0 Virtual 1.5-2.5 .5-.5 Sum(W-L) 5.5-9.5 13-5 % Wins 37% 72% Thanks to Ed Schroder and Amir Ban for there corrections. Hope I've got it right this time. Any corrections welcome. > >Computers seem to be holding there own against IM's based >on this event and other standard (or close to standard) time >control events against IM's (Hergott, recent Dominican Republic >tournament). My observation on commercial micro strength is that >the computer presently seems well suited to take on IM's and to >fair as good or better based on available data. > >Two strong players expressed their view on micro strength >in recent Chess Life articles. In the July >issue GM Lev Alburt said of chess computer strength, "Their current >tournament strength is about 2500 FIDE." Also in the Sept, '97 issue IM >Larry >Kaufman said, "2500 FIDE is a fair assessment for the strength of >the top PC chess programs". > >I'll toss my hat in with this strong IM label for the micros. Are there >any standard IM results that refute this assessment?
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.