Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Deep Fritz won a correspondence game

Author: stuart taylor

Date: 07:08:52 05/16/01

Go up one level in this thread


On May 16, 2001 at 07:53:07, Uri Blass wrote:

>On May 16, 2001 at 07:40:23, Jeroen van Dorp wrote:
>
>>On May 15, 2001 at 20:03:14, stuart taylor wrote:
>>
>>>>Some people might be too snobish to stoop so low as to rely on a computer over
>>>his own mind.
>>>Or simply, obstinate and closed-minded as to how good computers can be.
>>
>>
>>Maybe it's not being snobbish, or denying the excellence of a computer program,
>>but just missing the fun....
>>
>>Over at playchess.de a few computer cheaters were discovered, and that while
>>they have the opportunity to play advanced or even computer chess in a separate
>>competition.
>>It showed a guy playing over 130 games with assistance from Fritz, under four
>>accounts. He must have been busy operating, and he must have liked it, but
>>(especially because on this site you DO have the opportunity to use a computer
>>in two other leagues) people STILL use computer assistance in the *only* league
>>they shouldn't - really spoils MY fun.
>>
>>Discussing the merits of cheating/computer assistance someone told that blunders
>>never were a part of correspondence chess. Very true, but the suggestion rises
>>that all correspondence games should end in a draw, because of no tactical
>>mistakes.
>>
>>Not true, as small tactical mistakes - sometimes met with some nice novelties -
>>*are* a part of correspondence chess. Playing as a human gives you the
>>possibility to thrive on those weaknesses, and let the opponent stray.
>>
>>>
>>>I, actually believe I could beat many computer users through intelligent use of
>>>the same programs. But It takes a great amount of time and effort. But on wings.
>>>(using the computer is like adding wings).
>>
>>
>>With today's computer chess programs, you have to rely on 'horizon effects,
>>unfavourable 'closed position', 'anti-computer play', almost completely
>>"removing" the game of chess against a human. It's very well possible to draw or
>>beat a computer program when you're at a higher level in correspondence chess.
>>
>>Your analogy "adding wings" gives the problem (for me) of legalizing "computer
>>cheating" in correspondence chess a face: people in high jump trying to jump as
>>high as possible with their body are allowed to use a plane to jump.
>>Of course the world record will be a jump of over 30,000 feet, no doubt, but
>>it's no human high jump anymore.
>>
>>When I see Uri citing the game, with the names of the 'players' in it, I realize
>>it has nothing to do with human correspondence chess anymore.
>>
>>He likes it that way, and I'm happy to, but I won't enter those competitions
>>(anymore). Just because (as I already said) I can stay safely at home and play
>>against all the programs I have. Less than $500 - 700 and you have them all.
>>It's very rewarding to see after a game that my computer programs weren't able
>>to better my achievement in their analysis. Maybe I would have come to the same
>>moves using all my computer programs, but it was *me* taking the initiative, and
>>me finding the solution to an endfame I surely would screw up over the board.
>>
>>*I* think it's too bad seemingly human correspondence chess has disappeared.
>
>
>Human correspondence chess did not disapear.
>
>You can play against humans who do not use computers in the low level.
>I believe that many of my opponents in the previous stage did not use a computer
>and it is a fact that a big part of my opponents  did tactical errors.
>
>Vaichel is better than them and he did not do a serious error(the score never
>changed by more than 1 pawn after his moves but Deep Fritz was clearly enough to
>beat him)
>
>Uri

About ten years ago, I was playing correspondence in the iccf (Israel) and the
head organizer (who died, I believe) said I can certainly use a computer, but It
wouldn't get me very far. I think he was wrong, even then, and I was devising
lovely traps which I believed my big headed opponents were falling into, and I
was really going to teach them a lesson (so far, they believed they were
winning, and that I was a stupid player). But unfortunately It took me too long
to keep posting back my replies, and it got left in the middle.
  You had to play too many games at a time.
But I thought the organizer had this (Israeli) snobish attitude.
S.Taylor



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.