Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 14:35:06 03/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 2001 at 16:55:02, Brian Kostick wrote: >On March 30, 2001 at 16:07:31, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On March 30, 2001 at 15:20:05, James Robertson wrote: >> >>>I've noticed that a lot of programs are now battling the web. Does anybody know >>>how many people are actually voting though? Gambit Tiger, for instance, only has >>>the percentages, and not the actual numbers of voters. >>> >>>Out of curiosity, are these programs actually playing the "Web" or are they in >>>reality just playing a few dozen chess freaks from this site? Does anybody know >>>how many voters (even a very rough average will be interesting) there are for >>>the games Deep Fritz, Deep Shredder, and Gambit Tiger vs. the web? >>> >>>I'm hoping the numbers are not too low. The fact that Deep Shredder's game was >>>advertized on kasparovchess.com and TWIC is really good. Maybe this will attract >>>substantially more people. >> >>"X verses the Web" is an old gimmick. Actually, most of the time, "the web" >>plays much more poorly than a single good opponent. Imagine, a big committee >>voting on which move to make. Are most of them spending 24 hours of computer >>time analyzing a move or GM's themselves? Surely not. In general, it is a >>farce (to my way of thinking) but a nice way to gather publicity. I think the >>Kasparov match was different, however. For some reason, a very large group >>galvanized resources very well, and organized fairly efficiently. The >>commentary by the experts was quite good (and gave me new respect for I. Kush). >>At any rate, that sort of high quality match [despite the attempted sabotage] is >>_by far_ the exception rather than the rule. >> >>If you want to see very high quality chess, you will get far, far better by a >>match between two highly rated opponents than one high quality opponent verses >>the web. I think I could probably beat most people on the internet (which isn't >>saying much) but I am absolutely sure that a really good player like Vincent, >>Djordie, or Come would slaughter me repeatedly. So you get ten thousand morons >>to collectively make their choice -- how good is that choice going to be? Even >>if experts give excellent analysis -- will they even understand it? >> >>I suspect [snicker] that the higher the number of votes received, the LOWER the >>quality of the move generated. If a move got a million votes, it is almost SURE >>to be a real dog. >> >>IMO - YMMV. > >Dann, > > You write as if it's really ProgramX vs. the Web (where the Web describes >thinking, chess playing individuals?). In reality I think the winning vote ends >up being ProgramX vs. ManyPrograms, with 'ManyProgams' thinking maybe 16 >min./move average but that's really just a guess on my part. The major vote >discrepancies I've observed seem due to opening book lines. Regards, B.K. Depends on who participates, doesn't it? I think this match was also broadcast to a wide audience. If it was known only here, that would probably be the case (with a few good chess players throuwn in). In any case, I think that the "X verses the World!" matches are little more than parlour tricks. In fact, I don't like them.
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.