Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 12:03:42 06/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2001 at 12:55:28, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On June 13, 2001 at 12:19:55, Tapio Huuhka wrote: > >>On June 13, 2001 at 05:49:32, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>On June 13, 2001 at 03:42:41, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>> >>>>On June 12, 2001 at 23:56:26, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>> >>>>>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!;) >>> >>>That was a little wry humor, nothing more. I'ts not my fault you can't >>>appreciate it! >>>> >>>>Humans have a hard time coping with this. Really? I think it's you not >>>the GM's! >>>> >>>>A human who plays chess is an apple. A computer that plays chess is not an >>>>orange, but it's not quite an apple, either. You can compare them, but not >>>>perfectly. >>>As if I didn't know the difference? The arrogance! >>>> >>>>A ludicrous example: Compare an unarmed human with a tank. A tank can blow up >>>>a house at a range of over a kilometer, and can survive machine gun fire, >>>>whereas an unarmed human cannot blow up a house at a range of even one meter, >>>>and would fare badly against machine gun bullets. >>>> >>>>On the other hand, there are ditches that a tank cannot get out of, while a >>>>human might have an easy time with these ditches. >>>> >>>>You can't deny the tank its strengths just because there's a ditch a human can >>>>handle better. >>>> >>>>End of ludicrous example. Computers are getting better at being uniformly >>>>strong, but they are not now, and will probably never be, perfect human analogs. >>>> There will always be the possibility that a weak human player can say "duh" to >>>>one of these machines -- sometimes. >>> >>>How do you know that? Today I agree, fifty years from now A.I. may be born and a >>>"computer" for a lack of a better term will be irrepressible! >>>> >>>>bruce >>> >>>They only thing *Ludicrous* Bruce is your rude and ignorant reply! >>>I can beat these machines far more than you can imagine, and I'm _not_ a >>>_weak_ player! >>>And why did you snip my post? >>> >>>I was bieng humorous with last sentence that you included in your >>>reply! >>> >>>I've beaten some very strong players, _not_ just programms. >>>I don't care to be compared as a *frail* human in regards to chess and GM's as >>>*tanks* Mr. Moreland! >>> >>>By snipping my post, you missed my point entirely! >>> >>>I don't belittle your favorite "pet" , so please do not belittle me and my >>>playing strength relative to GM's! >>> >>>Terry >> >>I hope you have calmed down by now.:) Maybe I'm missing something, but I found >>Bruce's post just interesting, not insulting. I'm curious about your playing >>strength, because I couldn't find you on the FIDE list. So, what do you think is >>the playing strength of _not_ a weak player? :) >> >>Tapio > No I'm not on the FIDE list. My definition of a strong player varies. In a standard chess club anyone over 1800, on the world circuit 2600 and above. Of course those are extremes. In general anyone today with a rating above 2000 and plays for a hobby is strong, over 2200 is very strong. Expert is about 95% higher than an average tournament player, Master is about 99% better , while a Grandmaster is over 99.999% stronger. An average bieng about 1600. My data may be a little out of date but I'm sure it's close. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I saw those few lines in the post, and I thought they were interesting, so I >wrote a reply where I discussed that general topic. > >I didn't give one moment of consideration to Mr. McCracken's playing strength. >I assumed he was a normal generic player like the rest of us. If he wants to >announce that he's stronger than that, no problem. > >I would have responded the same way if the post had been written by Kasparov. > >bruce I apologize Mr. Moreland. I overreacted quite a bit, as I believe I misread your post, its' intent/meaning. I don't think well at 4:00am in the morning just after my cat knocked something over and woke me from a dead sleep! But hey that's no excuse, so sorry. I'm a good player...at times anyways;) However, I'm not a GM, but have given some good fights to some very strong masters on good days. But no, I'm not what I would think a _great_ player is. But few can be great!:) Regards, Terry (The Good but Not so Great Chessplayer)...;)
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.