Author: Mark Young
Date: 03:25:16 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 00:17:21, Chessfun wrote: >On June 25, 2001 at 22:01:57, Mark Young wrote: > >>On June 25, 2001 at 21:54:07, Mike S. wrote: >> >>>On June 25, 2001 at 18:15:41, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>>The results are bogus anyway, I can sit at home and win games as he did....Let >>>>me run the computer against Eduard....I bet the results would be much different. >>>> >>>>Why does he not play a 20 game match, the computer will learn what he is doing >>>>and pick a different way of playing against 2.Na3 Then he is toast. >>> >>>What matters then, is the single game (each) with a brilliant win against the >>>program, and not, if the learning feature may avoid repetition (or if some games >>>may be lost beforehand). That's not the point, but that these games can happen >>>at least once on each computer. I would be glad if I were capable of winning >>>such games regularly (I have some, but very few old one's). >>> >>>Furthermore, why call the results bogus, unless you have evidence that these >>>games aren't reproduceable or possible? That's not quite fair IMO. >> >>The point is we are talking about games under tournament conditions, not games >>sitting at home at blitz times, with no controls. Anyone can sit, play with the >>program, and produce games like this, but its not the same when you don't have >>control of the screen, program, and the settings of the program. > > >To me I see a different point. >Try playing a GM 50 times and see how many you'll win. >Forget the time controls for a second as IMO Eduard could easily >repeat this at tournament controls as I feel I also could. >Computers are known for being better at blitz than GM's simply log >onto ICC and have a look. With a computer once you find the path to >the win in most cases the path remains open. Simply play out of book >asap if you win the computer in all liklihood will repeat it's same mistakes. > >Try that against a GM. You tell me a GM who is willing to be exploited like we can the computer programs, and I might be able to produce a draw or a win also. Can I program holes in the human GMs book to let me FOOLS mate him. :) The point is sitting at home cooking up ways to exploit the computer is not what I would call tournament conditions. BTW: Eduard only posts his wins, and you don't know what his record would be under a fair test playing the computers under fair match or tournament conditions. > >Sarah. > > > > > > > > >> >>> >>>Regards, >>>M.Scheidl
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.