Author: Jonas Cohonas
Date: 17:16:21 05/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 12, 2001 at 19:04:10, Ed Panek wrote: >On May 12, 2001 at 15:56:42, Jonas Cohonas wrote: > >>On May 12, 2001 at 15:44:36, Aaron Tay wrote: >> >>>On May 12, 2001 at 15:26:13, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>> >>>>On May 12, 2001 at 14:43:12, Chris Kantack wrote: >>>> >>>>>I guess I'm on the side that Kramnik (having access to Deep Fritz months ahead >>>>>of time), will have little trouble winning the match. Indeed, he may be able >>>>>to play the entire match with 99% of the moves already "practiced". >>>> >>>>I doubt that Kramnik has an 8 processor cpu at home so he cannot "prepare" >>>>anything unless he own or have access to identical hardware. On an 8 processor >>>>cpu it would be a whole different game as to just playing against a dual or >>>>single cpu, the program running on 8 processors would look deeper and come up >>>>with bettter moves! >>> >>>You make it seem >>>like Kramnik is going to beat fritz at home, [after numerous takebacks] >>>then memorise the moves and then repeat them ..LOL . >> >>Maby you should read my post again.. where in the above post do i claim or imply >>that Kramnik is going to beat Fritz (at any hardware) with takebacks?? >>If Kramnik finds a winning line against Fritz 7 on a single processor cpu, then >>i am quite sure that it will not be a winning line on an 8 processor cpu because >>of the simple fact that he would get into a different game on the 8 pr unit than >>on the single cpu that was my point, and i think it is important to remember >>that when talking about how "easy" it will be for Kramnik when he can prepare >>month's in advance. Also Kramnik have no way of knowing if that copy he gets 3 >>month's before is infact the same as the one he is going to face!! >> >>Regards >>Jonas > > >Jonas, > > I wish I could agree with you, but 8 processors vs 1 at standard time >control will not allow the program to overcome any deficiencies Kramnik will >find in it. Searching one more ply for example will not change a poor evaluation >for a position. A program that doesnt understand how to play certain positions >will not "learn" how to play them by looking one ply deeper. 8 processors will >help Fritz tactically, but Kramnik will have already conceded tactics to the >beast on his home PIII 800 or anything else for that matter. A nominal computer >today is better than Kramnik at tactics. Speeding it up isnt going to help if >Kramnik understands the positions to avoid. Once he gets the program home he >will _LEARN_ how to draw and then beat it. > > For an analogy imagine a boxer and a wrestler are going to have a street >fight. The boxer will do what he does best and so will the wrestler. I would put >my money on the wrestler. The reason being is that in order for the boxer to win >he must force the wrestler to box which is difficult. In order for the wrestler >to win he must force the boxer to wrestle which is easier to do.here the boxer >has to land a devastating blow to the boxer to win. If the boxer and the wrestle >engage or go to the floor it is all over. Kramnik will do the same...play safe >openings and proceed with caution not allowing the computer any short term >attacks. THe position will look even or that Fritz is winning, but in reality as >the endgame approaches Kramnik will have a plan to beat or draw the computer. > > >Ed Wonderful analogy i am totally convinced now that you are right, infact this analogy should be used in the future to predict the outcome any chessmatch it is pure genius :-) Regards Jonas "let'swaitandseewhathappens" cohonas
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.