Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 20:56:26 06/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 12, 2001 at 22:52:22, Dann Corbit wrote: >On June 12, 2001 at 22:18:31, Slater Wold wrote: > >>I am not sure about the other CCC readers, but the recent "Are computers GM >>strength?" has gotten me curious. Are they? One would think. But then you see >>a computer play a bad game, and think, "HA! A 2100 COULD PLAY BETTER THAN >>THAT!" >> >>So let's finalize this. In a full rules, simulated FIDE event. I am talking >>about the 4 top programs vs 4 2500+ GM's. Swiss tournament, standard time >>controls. All the good stuff. Simulate ratings, and get a decent GUESS at >>what, in this tournament, the computers would achieve. >> >>I would rather a 3 round swiss tournament @ 120/0. 3 games against a GM is a >>good gathering of performance. 12 games. See how the computers do. >> >>The summer is arriving, and a lot of GM's will be playing a lot of tournaments >>soon. If you'd like to help, please contact me. If you can help, PLEASE >>contact me. If you want to tell me what a worthless waste of time this is, >>DON'T CONTACT ME! NOT EVEN ON THE CCC BOARD! I don't think anyone wants to >>hear it. >> >>I doubt ANYONE could argue the point of a 3 round swiss. If the computers walk >>away undefeated, then we'll know. It could be close, it could be a killing. >> >>If ANYONE has a better idea. PLEASE SPEAK NOW! > >I think it is a good idea, but I don't think it settles anything. > >Joe is a boxer. Joe goes undefeated in 12 fights. Then, in fight 13, the first >time he really gets pasted in the jaw, we discover Joe has a glass jaw. How >will Joe fare in his next 12 bouts? > >Fred is a boxer. Fred wins 12 bouts in a row. In the 13th bout, Fred gets >hammered every time his opponent uses an uppercut. How will Fred fare in the >next 13 bouts? > >On the other hand, if Kramnik gets handed his hat after careful preparation, I >think that will be very interesting. Not conclusive of course, but it would >definitely alter the way that I think about computer chess engines. Ah...Dan I couldn't agree more!:) Actually, though I think programms approach GM strength and even meet it if the GM's have no practise against computers. The ratings use to be considered closer to accurate if you were unfamilar with computer play or even a given programm! However, if and that's a _Big_ if, Kramnik loses with preparation then obviously enough said! But Kramnik is a very very strong GM and even without preparation should win. With preparation it should be a no contest, for Kramnik! But I believe all the good showings for programms in the last 6 even 7 years shows without knowlege of the said programm they are dangerous, even to GM's! Just check many recent tounaments, or even the "Computer Killer" Van der Weil, who lost a short match to Rebel 11.0 (Century 3.0)at TC/40 in 2! Also Anand to Rebel Century 1.2 in quick games! Many IM's and GM's have felt the teeth of these and many other programs like Fritz, Junior, Tiger etc. However, it's true they lose to much lower rated players, even to me sometimes!;) But I of course under tounament conditions the best programms would have a large advantage over me, especially at blitz!! I need at least a game in 25' to play a decent game against the aformentioned programms! And knowing weaknesses! My Mach III Master is only a toy which I have even beaten at times with no pieces on the board if I'm very familar with the position and of course Mach III's play which I am or use to be! lol Been awhile;) Regards, Terry McCracken P.S. It's a good idea Slater!:)
This page took 0.01 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.