Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 07:56:20 04/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 2001 at 10:01:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 30, 2001 at 07:22:24, Alvaro Polo wrote: > >>Hello all, >> >>In a recent interview Kramnik states that "We are in a very interesting phase, >>when the strength of the best GMs and that of the best chess engines run by the >>best processors are about equal." >> >>I know that this point (machines being GM strenght or nor) has been debated >>again and again and I don't intend to post a troll. I would just like to know if >>the consensus now among chess programmers is wether Kramnik is right or not. For >>instance, I remember Bob Hyatt saying that computers are really 2450, etc. But >>software evolves, CPU power evolves and perhaps now there is agreement that >>machines are finally GM strenght? >> >>Thanks. >> >>Alvaro Polo > > >I personally think my estimate is still pretty close. Computers have two >serious problems: > >1. opening books. They depend on a human to "play the game" of choosing good >and bad openings. This leaves them highly vulnerable to opening preparation and >traps. Particularly when you practice against one copy and then play another >copy which doesn't have the 'learning' from the practice games. > >2. blocked positions and slow build-ups in kingside attacks. Hardly anyone >has made progress in fighting either of these problems. And they _still_ offer >good chances for a GM that is willing to employ them. Problem is the results speak against your opinion. I don't think the current top programs aren't without chance against Kramnik. Ed
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.