Author: Martin Schubert
Date: 03:02:36 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 05:30:21, Uri Blass wrote: >On June 26, 2001 at 05:21:27, Martin Schubert wrote: > >>On June 26, 2001 at 05:15:56, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>On June 26, 2001 at 05:06:36, Martin Schubert wrote: >>> >>>>On June 26, 2001 at 04:53:05, Mark Young wrote: >>>> >>>>>ChessTiger has now produced 2 wins in a row and a draw against strong titled IM >>>>>players. It must be noted ChessTiger is doing this on hardware that is not >>>>>considered ultra fast PIII 866 256 MB Ram. Most people own hardware this good or >>>>>better. This is not a chess program running on thousands of dollars with of >>>>>equipment with 8 CPUs. >>>>> >>>>>If ChessTiger continues playing as well as it is, the 2100 elo crowd or the No >>>>>way computers are GM crowd will have to come up with someway to explain this >>>>>performance. As I doubt it will change anyone’s mind even if ChessTiger wins >>>>>this tournament. >>>> >>>>The performance is easy to explain. Like in the tournaments last year with the >>>>participation of Fritz and Junior a lot of players don't know how to play >>>>against computers. There are some games which could be played by players with >>>>rating <2000 as well. >>> >>>I don’t think this that arguments passes the laugh test, most players’ trainee >>>with some kind of computer aid, chess bases, programs etc. They have too, to >>>compete in today’s chess tournaments. Programs have been around for many years, >>>and I would doubt this is any players first time seeing a chess computer. >> >>Playing against computers and playing against humans are two different >>disciplines. Maybe like 100meter and 400meter hurdles. If you practise mainly >>for one discipline you're not that good in the other one. >>Maybe you can take a look at Eduard Nemeth's games. He has no problem beating >>all of the programs. His rating is maybe 2100. After reading his articles I >>could beat Shredder 5 without much effort (my rating about 1900). > >I am sure he also lose against the programs and not only wins but he does not >post games when he lost because of tactical errors. > >>Just look about the game Tiger played in round 3. You want to tell me that his >>opposite played like 2400? Like an IM? I think already the opening was a >>disaster. > >I am not sure if the opening was a disaster. >The evaluation of the program was close to 0.00 after the opening. >Chesstiger even evaluated the position as 0.30 against itself after 24 moves. > >Uri You're right. It was not a disaster. But I think it's important against computers to achieve a position where humans are better than computers. Not a good position. Kramnik said that his position against Junior last year wasn't good. But it was exactly the right against a computer. I don't think the IM reached a position which is good for beating a computer.
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.