Author: rubidio
Date: 04:34:40 04/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 08, 2001 at 00:51:41, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 07, 2001 at 23:31:18, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 07, 2001 at 18:25:44, robert flesher wrote: >> >>>Hello everyone i downloaded Chess Genius 2 last night. >> >>Do you mean to the Dos version or to 2.016? >> >> I must say that anyone >>>who likes genius this is a must. I find the interface that comes with Shredder >>>is rather poor with a slow mouse response. However this interface is fast and >>>simple. For strength i tested it Against good old hiarcs 7.01 30 min each. I >>>expected Hiarcs to destroy genius as this is a old program. After Three games 1 >>>draw two wins for genius. You can imagine my shock. >> >>Did you use one computer for the test. >> >>I ask because I have doubts about tests on one computer because one program may >>be slowed down by a significant factor. >> >> >> I know everyone This is not >>>enough to draw hasty conclusions, although it shows that even old GENIUS2 can >>>hold its own to newer commercial programs. Maybe this shouldnt come as a >>>surprise as it was this same program that beat Kasparov himself in in 1994 at an >>>intel speed tournement. >> >>No >>Genius2.9 that is almost identical to Genius3 won kasparov in 1994. >> >>Kasparov was wrong to think that he is playing Genius2 and I guess that this is >>the reason that he lost. > > > >This kind of reasonning is a mystery to me. > >Can you explain to me why Kasparov (or somebody else) is supposed to have no >problem if it is a known program, and be totally disturbed if it is a slightly >improved version? > >Do you think that a human can prepare against all the possible chess positions >if he has the opportunity to test the program? > >Are you going to say that it is a matter of opening preparation? In this case, >do you believe that Lang is so stupid that he would have played with the same >book as the commercial version? > >Anyway, do you think Kasparov would have devoted the time needed to find holes >in Genius book? > >I would bet that even a computer chess expert cannot tell the difference in >playing style between Genius 2 and Genius 3, so I would not buy the "difference >in playing style" explanation either. > > > > Christophe I agree with Christophe here, this kind of post, that keeps everything blurred doesn't helps anybody. I think that computer-chess is not some Kabalah stuff, it lays in well known algorythms. And, finally, if my mother had wings she could fly!
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.