Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:34:16 04/15/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2001 at 03:56:56, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 14, 2001 at 18:17:50, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 14, 2001 at 17:04:39, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On April 14, 2001 at 14:30:35, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >>> >>>>On April 14, 2001 at 14:01:51, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 14, 2001 at 13:26:12, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>You should first mention that you are quoting here the Millennium website. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>It’s a well-known fact: the German chess program SHREDDER is not only the >>>>>>reigning, Absolute (we get it) Computer Chess World Champion and a three times >>>>>>Microcomputer World Champion but, with a recent series of additional tournament >>>>>>wins, SHREDDER has been beyond any doubt world’s most successful(computer) chess >>>>>>tournament program over the past 5 years. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>When I read this, I feel like I should retire right now from computer chess. It >>>>>sounds so hopeless to try to do anything against such a monster program. >>>>> >>>>>:) :) :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> With this in mind, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen >>>>>>of Düsseldorf, in late 2000 challenged the winner of the London Braingames World >>>>>>Championship tournament to a match man against computer. Following Vladimir >>>>>>Kramnik’s surprise win over Garry Kasparov, we were informed at the beginning of >>>>>>this year that ‘Braingames’ has come to an agreement with the Government of >>>>>>Bahrain, where in October 2001 a tournament is to take place between the two >>>>>>world champions, Kramnik and SHREDDER. Negotiations regarding the details of >>>>>>this match have been going on for some time. >>>>>>It came therefore as no small surprise when Stefan Meyer-Kahlen received an >>>>>>invitation for a so-called ‘Braingames Computer Chess World Championship’ which >>>>>>– out of the blue – was to serve as a qualifying round for the match against >>>>>>Kramnik. Furthermore (and much to Stefan’s astonishment), this qualification >>>>>>tournament was to be held in closed session, ie excluding the public as well as >>>>>>the programmers concerned, in the private residence of a Spanish computer chess >>>>>>tester. As an entry fee, each programmer was to pay no less than US$ 5,000. It >>>>>>is quite clear that the reigning Absolute Computer World Champion has no >>>>>>interest whatsoever defending his title at this kind of ‘living-room >>>>>>tournament’. An official title can be defended only at a regular and public >>>>>>World Championship tournament under the auspices of an official and independent >>>>>>organisation, such as the ICCA. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Notice how the author very eleganty avoids to mention any other top chess >>>>>program involved in the tournament. >>>>> >>>>>That's art. :) >>>>> >>>>>Sounds like JUST mentionning them would be a serious threat to the reputation of >>>>>Millennium's baby, at least in the writer's mind. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Is there any confirmation that the above statement is non-biased? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>:) :) :) :) >>>>> >>>>>Are you so new in computer chess that you can believe that something coming from >>>>>the Millennium website is unbiased? :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Christophe >>>> >>>> >>>>Christophe, >>>> >>>>which program must play against Vladimir Kramnik ? >>>> >>>>Chess Tiger ? >>>> >>>>:) (one is enough) >>> >>> >>> >>>I have already given my point of view on this issue. >>> >>>In short: >>>1) I still do not understand the arbitrary choice of Deep Fritz, Deep Junior and >>>Deep Shredder >> >>This choice is because of the fact that they are the best programs that can use >>more than 1 processor. >> >>I guess that you agree that these programs on 8 processors are better than tiger >>on one processor in comp-comp games. >> >>I do not know about comp-human games but we have no information to know which >>program is better in comp-human games because we have almost no data about >>tournament time control games between humans and computers so it is logical to >>choose the best program in comp-comp games. >> >> >>>2) Why is the winner of such a closed tournament supposed to perform the best >>>against a player of a totally different kind? >> >>I expect better players to perform better against kramnik. >>I believe that in most of the case better player against computer are also >>better against humans. >> >>Not in every case but when we have no data about games against humans we use the >>data we have about games against computers. >> >>Uri > > > >Tell me Uri: we all know that against computers there are some human players >that are much better than others. And these players are not necessarily the best >against their peers. > >I sounds logical to assume that the same thing could happen with computer >players. That against humans, some computers could perform better than others, >even if they are not the best against other computers. I agree but thanks to fide's decision against chess programs we have not enough games at tournament time control to know which program is better against humans and I believe that in most of the cases the better player against computers is also the better player against humans. It is correct also for humans and in most of the cases the better human against humans is also the better player against computers. I also believe that hardware is relevant against humans and the last match of Rebel against humans proved that Rebel could find a better move to save the game that it lost with more time. I believe that at tournament time control all the anti computer systems of Crafty and tiger are not going to be a big advantage and may be even a disadvantage against strong players. If tiger is going to play weaker moves against kramnik only in order not to block the position than kramnik may win by tactics against it. It is not truth against weak humans or at blitz but if we are talking about tournament time control games against kramnik then playing the best moves may be more important than trying to avoid blocked positions. Uri
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.