Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:57:27 06/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 11, 2001 at 09:05:21, Chessfun wrote: >On June 10, 2001 at 02:55:54, odell hall wrote: > >>On June 10, 2001 at 02:52:50, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>On June 10, 2001 at 02:14:50, odell hall wrote: >>> >>>>On June 09, 2001 at 23:56:07, Slater Wold wrote: >>>> >>>>>No. I don't think so. It was only 2 games, and not even tournament length >>>>>games at that. >>>>> >>>>>When I saw how easily Petr defeated Deep Shredder, I was amazed. He was >>>>>kibitz'ing most of the game. Like he didn't even have to concentrate. >>>>> >>>>>Remember, he said that Deep Shredder performance was approx. 2100-2200 FIDE in >>>>>the game against him? (Which it played 100x worse against him, I agree.) Guess >>>>>what Petr said about these games? >>>>> >>>>>Thoughts on ending of game 1: >>>>> >>>>>Petrovich(GM) kibitzes: it's very difficult for human to play positions with >>>>>compensations for a pawn >>>>> >>>>>Petrovich(GM) kibitzes: may be just white has no sufficient compensation :) >>>>>Project played like Machine :)) >>>>> >>>>>Game 2: >>>>> >>>>>Petrovich(GM) kibitzes: 4...Bxc3? >>>>> >>>>>Petrovich(GM) kibitzes: I beat Jrlok never play Bxc3 vs human GM :) >>>>> >>>>>Petrovich(GM) kibitzes: please think about it :) >>>>> >>>>>Petrovich(GM) kibitzes: comp played opening like patzer again >>>>> >>>>>And about the series: >>>>> >>>>>Petrovich(GM) tells you: hmm, comp played like 2200 in the closed position and >>>>>like 2600 in open :) It's hard to evaluate his strength >>>>> >>>>>Petrovich(GM) tells you: so, 2200+2600 / 2 = 2400 :) lol >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Petr and I just went over quickly the games. These are not annotated or >>>>>anything, just general conversation on the games. >>>>> >>>>>Also, please be aware that when I played Petr, I did _NOT_ prepare at all. I >>>>>asked him for a game, and we played. Having been singled out by JRLOK, I >>>>>prepared an better book. This time when I played JRLOK, there was no in & out >>>>>of book problems. >>>>> >>>>>Shredder played a much better game this time around, than last. However, I am >>>>>not ready to say that Shredder is GM strength. Like Robert said, to be 2600 you >>>>>have to play like a 2600 every game. Not 2100 here and 2700 here. 2600 ALL THE >>>>>TIME. >>>>> >>>>>I am planning more and more GM vs Shredder games. Perhaps at the end of this >>>>>year, we can make a FAIR guess at Deep Shredder's ELO. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Slate >>>> >>>> >>>> Well if what he said is true, a 2100-22000 just beat roman , one of the >>>>strongest grandmasters in computer chess around, and that is impressive. >>> >>>NO NO NO! He rated my performance against HIM as being about 2100-2200! Just >>>_ONE_ game! >>> >>>There's NO doubt Deep Shredder is stronger, it just had a "bad game." >>> >>> >>>Slate >> >> >>Yep just like many humans, i was surprised though that jrlok lost, since he >>knows computer chess so well, i expected a win. > > >Just my 2 cents for what it's worth. >Roman may lose to your program first few times, even first ten times. >But once he sees what book lines you have, what positions you play moves like a3 >or h3 in. Then he will play some more and win some. Make no changes and he will >pound you to pieces. This is one of the reasons I think Bob believes computers >are NOT GM strength. > >Sarah. This is correct. Computers "learn" by way of their programmers. If the programmers are removed from the equation, computers will start to look stupid against players like him.
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.