Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: This guy is still not a cheater

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 22:01:55 11/15/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 16, 2000 at 00:54:25, Peter Kappler wrote:

>
>I with you 100%, Bruce.
>
>Any decent player who takes 2 minutes to look at this game will realize that
>there is nothing fishy going on.  It's a completely routine win - White did
>nothing special other than achieve a typical attacking position that centered
>around a textbook tactical theme that any human can spot from a mile away.
>
>Bob, I'm sorry, but your argument about the mate in 7 being suspicious is just
>ridiculous.  You need to look at this game again.  The guy could played the last
>9 moves blindfolded.  (By the way, I think he could have mated a move earlier by
>playing 26. f6 instead of 26. Bxc4.)
>


This is already moot.  I looked at it right after Bruce first responded,
and agreed that the mate in 7 was trivial since it was mostly spite
checks.  I am still mildly concerned that a computer found no tactical errors
by white, in a blitz game, which is very unusual, but not impossible.

However, as I have said before, I don't label cheaters based on one game.  I
was really commenting on the statement that was suggesting that Tiger got
planted deeply by a human that should not really be able to do that.  And
the first bit of analysis I did was suspicious.  I didn't look at other
games... when I cut the moves to analyze them, I omitted the pgn headers,
and never thought about trying to find out who the guy was.

I don't consider the issue of "he cheated" as the main point of what I wrote.
The main point was that when a program loses to a low-rated player on a chess
server, 99% of the time something is up.  Maybe _not_ in this case, of course.
But in general, it doesn't happen.  Even the Elo formula agrees.



>This whole debate is really absurd.  It's just a textbook anti-computer attack
>-- *exactly* the kind where an 1800 player can beat a computer.

I have had 1800 players try this for a hundred games, with no success.  Not that
it couldn't happen. But it is so rare as to raise a red flag...



>
>--Peter



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.