Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 19:55:47 06/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 04, 2001 at 20:56:50, Dann Corbit wrote:
>On June 04, 2001 at 20:49:45, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On June 04, 2001 at 18:15:03, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>On June 04, 2001 at 17:44:56, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>What a major mistake. Strong chess players are not the people of choice to
>>>>create a strong chess computer.
>>>
>>>Berliner did OK.
>>
>>Frans Morsch
>>Amir Ban
>>Christophe Théron
>>Christian Donninger
>>Steen Suurballe
>>Mark Uniacke
>>Rudolf Huber
>>Ed Schröder
>>Bob Hyatt
>>Johan de Koning
>>Marty Hirsch
>>Stefan Meyer-Kahlen
>>Richard Lang
>>
>>
>>These are the names of the programmers of the highest rated chess programs
>>(order of the list).
>>
>>How many of these guys are "in the top flight of their national chess rankings"?
>>
>>How many of these top programmers are you going to reject by selecting people
>>who are "in the top flight of their national chess rankings"?
>>
>>For your information I don't think I would get a 1800 FIDE elo rating if tried.
>
>I know for sure several are 2000 or better. Ed Schroder is a very good player
>(IIRC -- at least I have seen games of his with brilliant moves). Robert Hyatt
>was around 2000 [again IIRC].
>
>Be that as it may [and even if wrong], Berliner was a world champion and also a
>GM.
>It only takes a single counterexample to refute a statement {mathematically!}
>;-)
If your contention is that great chess ability should be a primary selection
criterion if you are trying to find people to build a great chess program, then
a counterexample won't suffice.
There have been several titled players who have tried to mix chess and
computers. There have been a whole lot of lesser players. The correlation
between strength of player and strength of program is nowhere near direct. Most
of the strong programs are written by A players or Experts. The components of a
strong program can be understood well enough by these people.
If you gave me a list of people who were going to try to build chess programs,
and I had to pick which one would be most likely to succeed, I would probably
put the GM behind the A-players, because the A-player is probably an A-player
because he dropped chess because at some point he became obsessed by a great
need to hack, and the GM is probably a GM because he loves to play chess, and is
doing computers to pay the bills.
Love of programming beats love of chess, in this field.
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.