Author: Georg Langrath
Date: 05:17:35 04/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 1998 at 13:42:16, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On April 17, 1998 at 07:20:48, Georg Langrath wrote: > >>All this talk about strength. I suppose that 99.9 % of us are beaten >>from all modern chessprograms if it plays about 10 seconds per move.. So >>what is important? Features, I think. Of course it is of interest to see >>how strong a computerchess can be. But I think that for usual buyers >>the other features should be more emphasised. > >Features and playing style. > >Nobody wants to play against something that plays like oatmeal, even if >the oatmeal program is objectively stronger than non-oatmeal programs, >assuming there are any. > >bruce Yes, you are right. I forgot to mention playing style. In future computerchess there will perhaps be more possibilities to change playing style. There could for example be features to make the chess more willing to make position sacrifices. It would be a more interesting opponent, and it wouldn’t matter if the program lost ELO-points on it. Let’s say it lost 200 ELO-points for being wild sacrificing. Then it would have perhaps 2300 ELO-points instead of 2500. So what if you got a more fun opponent to play against? 2300 points is more than enough for me and most of us. If you think in these terms perhaps "Chess System Tal" is already near the ideal?
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.