Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 14:27:40 04/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 1998 at 13:57:15, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >DB may beat the best micro by 8.5-1.5, or even, 9-1, or, 10-0, but this >does NOT mean that its results against humans will be just as good, and >300 rating points better. I'd venture to say that its hypothetical >results vs humans should not exceed the best micro's results by more >than 100-150 rating points. Thus, we talk of two different things -- DB >may exploit a micro (or chess software)'s weaknesses quite consistently, >but this does not apply to humans who are always prone to mistakes, >errors, etc. Thus, another 'guestimate': DB (approximately) 2700, best >micro (computer software) on a Pentium II / AMD K6 400 Mhz 2550-2600. Yes, I interpreted the question in terms of a match between the two, but it's fair and probably more common to interpret it your way. Another difference between human-machine and machine-machine play is that some machines are prone to making obvious long-term mistakes, which humans will exploit without ever letting the game get out of control. 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.