Author: Slater Wold
Date: 21:11:28 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. At 26-0-0 Mike Tyson became the World Champion boxer. Then the trouble began. He has lost his last 2 BIG fights. Ask any boxing fan who is one of the greatest boxers of all times. Of course we all have problems. Humans have tactically disadvatages against comptuers, computer have horizon problems with humans. In the end, I am willing to bet it's ALMOST even. In a closed game, a GM has the upperhand. In an open game, the computer has the upperhand. It's easy to spot a weakness in a computer. However, how easy is it to expose it? Faults do NOT make the player. Faults make excuses. I don't want any excuses. I think that a 3 round swiss, 4 computers & 4 GM's, will bring us just THAT more closer to determining REAL strength. And I plan to give ALL the GM's ample time to "prepare." They can go to ICC and play every program THOUSANDS of times, on the best hardware. There's NO excuse for not preparing. I read a post here tonite, a bickering between Robert and Mark, and now I am vowing to do whatever it takes, to make this happen. I think it's for the good of chess. And will either give Robert or Mark a leg to stand on. We can all get together and play 1,000,000 games of C vs C chess, and then these programs go lose to a GM. Which is more exciting? Which has more substance? I will start the process tomorrow. I will keep everyone posted. Like I said, if you can help, please let me know. It will be appreciated. Slate
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.