Author: Rajen Gupta
Date: 09:00:43 05/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 24, 2001 at 09:49:51, stuart taylor wrote: >On May 24, 2001 at 08:24:47, Rajen Gupta wrote: > >>On May 24, 2001 at 07:55:37, Mogens Larsen wrote: >> >>>On May 24, 2001 at 07:36:12, Rajen Gupta wrote: >>> >>>>something to do with the learning function, not just in openings but also i >>>>suspect during the game itself when it plays an alternate move, which may turn >>>>out to be better. >>> >>>When did Frans Morsch implement position learning? >>> >>>Mogens. >> >>i dont know but i have noticed it in a few games. dont ask me for examples, i >>dont have them >> >>rajen > >So this doesn't show that Fritz is all that great in actual chess playing. >If It's opponent had randomly different styles in all it's games, then Fritz >would be seen for what it really is. Weaker! > >All this shows you that chess might not be 100% scientific! > >S.Taylor i dont agree with you on that either-all i'm saying is that from my observations on ssdf matches, long matches against relatively equal opponents seems to favour fritz-whether ths is mere chance or whether it involves a more aggressive form of book learning, i cant say. i dont quite know what you mean by scientific-it is as scientific as any other sport or zero sum game involving 2 players, where the starting position is identical, and where external influences have no role in the outcome of the match. rajen
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.