Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 18:34:53 01/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 2001 at 10:02:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 12, 2001 at 00:41:33, Garry Evans wrote: > >> A short while ago, i asked you on ICC, would you acknowledge that computers are >>of Grandmaster Strength if Rebel Won the Match against Van der Wiel, your answer >>Was yes!! So would you please honour this agreement and acknowledge here in >>Public that computers are GM Strength? > > >2-3 years ago my estimate was that the programs were at about 2400-2450 on >the FIDE Elo level. I would probably change that to barely 2500 for today's >much-faster hardware. I wouldn't begin to suggest they are beyond 2500 >yet, however. They _still_ have a lot of weaknesses. Hi Bob, I don't usually participate in this sort of discussion but hey, its a slow progamming day :-) Personally I'd bump that 2500 up to around 2550, which I guess is 'GM strength' whatever that means exactly. I think its easy to over estimate the strength of humans, because they are capable of playing very profound chess. However the practicalities of playing chess free of tactical mistakes are definitely non trivial, even for GMs. Relentless tactical pressure definitely works against GMs, a fact clearly exploited by players such as Kortchnoi and Fischer. Also, we now have comps that are more than capable of exploiting small positional advantages and grinding out points that way. I hear that GMs will 'learn to exploit computers', as if chess computers were just invented yesterday. Of course they will score the occasional impressive anti-computer victory, but I think these are becoming increasingly more difficult to pull off. Perhaps the trend is more a case of the programmers learning to exploit the GMs? cheers, Peter
This page took 0.01 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.