Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 15:57:46 05/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 12, 2001 at 18:34:29, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >On May 12, 2001 at 18:26:31, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > >>On May 12, 2001 at 18:08:38, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >> >>>On May 12, 2001 at 16:28:51, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>> >>>>On May 12, 2001 at 16:23:21, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 12, 2001 at 16:11:09, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>In my opinion no program can - on tournament level 40/120 - get more than 2300 >>>>>>ELO against solid human players. The shorter the time control the higher the >>>>>>perfomance of the computer programs. And by the way, the SSDF list is at least >>>>>>about 200-300 ELO too high. >>>>>>Kurt >>>>> >>>>>Then how did DJ6 score 2703 against Human Gm's??? >>>>> >>>>>Regards >>>>>Jonas >>>> >>>>Study the games, and you will not much see of what I understand about soldid >>>>playing. As already mentioned earlier I still get about 30 % against the >>>>monsters without using any anti computer strategy. And this should simply not be >>>>possible for a player with about 2000 ELO? >>>> >>>>Regards >>>>Kurt >>> >>>What hardware do you run the progs on when you get a 30% score? is that a 30% of >>>ALL the games you have played against progs? if so could you please post ALL the >>>games so i can see the 30% score with my own eyes? To say that the games DJ6 >>>played against GM's where not what you concider "solid" chess is to say that the >>>GM's played weak against DJ6 if they had played "solid" they would have >>>capitalized on DJ6 "unsolid" play, to play for a draw against any of the top 10 >>>prog's, atleast 1 year ago, is not so hard if that is your main goal from the >>>word go, but to win is whole other kedle of fish!!! and since GM's play to win >>>and not to DRAW! they wil get stomped once in a while. >>> >>>Regards >>>Jonas >> >>I think you have mentioned something very important: the GM's almost always play >>to win and unfortunately even in situations where positions are equal. This does >>not function against computers. And furthermore we should not forget one thing, >>namely the psychological factor: if GM's are playing vs machines in public, the >>are under a severe pressure to demonstrate their strenght. Please look at the >>games Rebel Century3 vs John van der Wiel: It is hardly understandable how many >>times van der Wiel made tactical blunders. Would the GM have made the same >>mistakes against a human opponent? I am not at all sure. My opinion is the >>following: If John van der Wiel played against computers at home without being >>"disturbed" by any kind of public pressure, he would at 40/120 win against Rebel >>Century3 without much difficulty. >>Regards >>Kurt > >Is that a fact? do you know that he would win or are you doing a wee bit of >speculation here? you say that it does not work to play for a win in equal >positions against a program, is that because of their "unsolid" play? and when a >2700+ human GM tries to win and fails is that because the program is unsolid?? >If anything todays topten programs run on the best hardware are very SOLID!!! > >Regard >Jonas Of course it's not a fact but merely a speculation based on some experience. Some years ago I played with board computers at our club tournament and noticed that in most cases the "strong" players showed a comparatively bad chess (quite below their standard) whereas the weaker players had often not much difficulty in drawing or even winning. Now it's late, I need some sleep (1.00). Regards Kurt
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.