Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 06:35:21 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. Yes, and sheer strength first of all. It is not only a matter of whether or not I can beat the program. To me at least this is secondary. It is more a question of seeing how engines get more and more clever, of analyzing a game or a position with a powerful tool. Oh well, perfectionism might be the word. I think all of us here with many programs that beat us are perfectionists. I wonder how many of us have the same attitude towards stereo (Audio Research, etc)and photography (Leicas, Zeiss, Hasselblad). I do. Or with cars, boats, motorcycles... Enrique >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
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.