Author: Mark Schreiber
Date: 04:24:38 01/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2001 at 19:30:02, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On January 05, 2001 at 16:22:34, Mark Schreiber wrote: > >>On January 05, 2001 at 12:57:19, Ernst Walet wrote: >> >>>Still, according to me, you cannot completely compare the two matches, as in >>>Dortmund Junior played each opponent just once (as far as I know), while Rebel >>>plays the same opponent six times. >>> >>>Ernst. >>> >> >>You’re right, we can not compare the 2 matches. The Super-GM Dortmund was harder >>for Junior. It had 9 rounds instead of 6 rounds Rebel is playing. So there was >>more opportunity for the humans to find and learn Junior’s mistakes. There were >>more humans looking for Junior’s mistakes. Also Dortmund had much stronger >>players. I don’t think v/d Wiel would have any chance with the 8 processor >>Junior. >>Mark > >Van der Wiel never lost to a computer in a slow game. I don't know about Junior, >but Fritz on a multiprocessor machine lost to van der Wiel half a year ago in an >official game. If you look at it you will realize what he does to programs. > >[Event "ch-NED"] >[Site "Rotterdam NED"] >[Date "2000.05.19"] >[Round "11"] >[White "Van der Wiel, J."] >[Black "Fritz SSS"] >[Result "1-0"] >[ECO "D00"] >[WhiteElo "2558"] >[PlyCount "91"] >[EventDate "2000.05.07"] > >1. d4 d5 2. c3 Nf6 3. Bg5 Ne4 4. Bf4 g5 5. Bc1 h6 6. e3 Bg7 7. Bd3 Nd7 8. c4 >Ndf6 9. f3 Nd6 10. c5 Nf5 11. Ne2 g4 12. f4 Qd7 13. Nbc3 Qe6 14. Qd2 Bd7 15. b4 >h5 16. a4 O-O-O 17. Kd1 h4 18. b5 Kb8 19. Rb1 h3 20. g3 Be8 21. a5 Ka8 22. Ke1 >Bd7 23. Kf2 a6 24. Qc2 Rb8 25. Bd2 axb5 26. Nxb5 Bxb5 27. Rxb5 Ne4+ 28. Bxe4 >Qxe4 29. Qxe4 dxe4 30. Nc3 e6 31. Nxe4 Ne7 32. Ng5 Rhf8 33. Rhb1 Ka7 34. a6 >bxa6 35. Rxb8 Rxb8 36. Rxb8 Kxb8 37. Nxf7 Kc8 38. Ng5 Kd7 39. Ke2 Nf5 40. Ne4 >Kc6 41. Nf2 Nh6 42. Ba5 Bf6 43. Kd3 Kd7 44. e4 Bg7 45. Kc4 Kc6 46. Bd2 1-0 > >Enrique > All of Van der Wiel games except the one against Fritz sss were played in 1997 and earlier. That’s 4 years ago. A long time for chess programs. That’s 164 SSDF points. So he played only 1 game with the current programs and on current computers. 1 game does not make him a computer killer against today’s smarter programs running on today’s faster computers. Deep Junior is not Fritz sss. Fritz sss was running on P3 500 mhz 4 processor. Deep Junior was running on much faster P3 700 mhz 8 processor. Van der Wiel would have no chance in a 6 game match with Deep Junior on an 8 processor. > >>>On January 05, 2001 at 12:53:19, Ernst Walet wrote: >>> >>>>On January 05, 2001 at 12:50:37, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 05, 2001 at 12:38:27, Ernst Walet wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 05, 2001 at 12:20:16, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On January 05, 2001 at 11:44:01, Ernst Walet wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On January 05, 2001 at 07:50:42, Mark Schreiber wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>In the match with v/d Wiel, Rebel is running on P3 866 MHz. Using a faster >>>>>>>>>computer would be an improvemnt. Maybe a P4 1.5 GHz. They could also improve >>>>>>>>>Rebel to run on dual or multi processor like Junior. The Junior that ran on an 8 >>>>>>>>>processor at Dortmund would clobber v/d Wiel. At Dortmund, Junior performed at >>>>>>>>>Fide 2700. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I believe the games at Dormunt had a faster time control, so you cannot compare >>>>>>>>the rating. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The truth "believes" that the games at dortmund had no faster time control. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>> >>>>>>Thank you for calling me a liar. >>>>> >>>>>I did not call you a liar. >>>>> >>>>>I remember that the games were tournament time control but I was not sure if it >>>>>was exactly the same time control so I looked in the following link >>>>> >>>>>http://www.chessbase.com/events/dortmund2000/dort09.htm >>>>> >>>>>I found that leko lost after a game of 6 hours against Deep Junior and it means >>>>>that the time control was not faster than the games of Rebel against van der >>>>>Wiel. >>>>> >>>>>Only after I found this information I responded. >>>>> >>>>>I did not like the fact that you posted "I believe" without checking and this >>>>>was the reason for my response(the truth "believes"). >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>>"I believe" was meant as "As far as I know" and not as "I am sure". >>>> >>>>Misunderstanding, no harm done. >>>> >>>>Ernst.
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.