Author: Mark Young
Date: 06:18:00 06/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 12, 2001 at 09:00:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 12, 2001 at 06:47:59, odell hall wrote: > >>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. >> >> >> Hi Sarah >> >> >> I am curios what do you believe? Since you have done alot of testing of >>programs, (and i have been to your site, very nice). Do you think they are Gm >>Strength? I realize that technically they can never be Grandmasters , since Fide >>will not give the title to a computer. > > >Shouldn't you be asking a human GM? Would you ask a policeman if "XXX" is a >great brain-surgeon??? Would you ask a brain-surgeon if "YYY" is a great >programmer? Etc... > >I don't think that someone that is _not_ a GM is really qualified to answer >this question, particularly if they don't know a _great_ deal about what goes >on inside a chess program... and even then, they will need GM input... Bob, GM opinion does not even factor into weather someone is a GM or not. They do not poll GM's and ask If X is a GM. What matters is Wins, Losses, and Draws, and who the Wins, Losses, and Draws were against, Example you must score well in tournaments that meet the norms, and for tournament to meet the norm they must have GM's playing in them. You do not need to be a Grandmaster to understand this. Grandmasters are not determined by opinion but Results!
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.