Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 19:52:19 06/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
Perhaps the debate could be clarified - well, I will try to do so- a little bit if we discern between brute strenght showed by results and the quality of a game, mainly grounded in positional understanding. In this last aspect I cannot but to agree with you Bob; programs are not GM in quality of the game they offer. That's clear. Nevertheless, in terms of results, maybe the other guy has a point. Probably this is a tricky issue because chess games usually ends for a tactical reason a lot of times, so the positional aspect is hidden. A computer could be positionally busted and even so win the game because in the last minute the human side missed a blow. It has happened to me -an to infinite human chess player- thousands of times and I think it happens all the time to GM, although in a lot more higher ground of finesse. So, in the paper, measured from a point of view of "pure" chess, programs ar at most 2100 or 2200 players; in the realm of facts, of rsults, they win enough times to be considered, I believe IM strenght players, sometimes even more. Fernando
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.