Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Someone Better Stop Tiger or This GM Debate is Going to be over Quick!

Author: Mark Young

Date: 03:38:26 06/26/01

Go up one level in this thread


On June 26, 2001 at 06:31:33, Martin Schubert wrote:

>On June 26, 2001 at 06:15:02, Mark Young wrote:
>
>>On June 26, 2001 at 06:08:34, Martin Schubert wrote:
>>
>>>On June 26, 2001 at 06:02:34, Mark Young wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 26, 2001 at 05:58:52, Martin Schubert wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On June 26, 2001 at 05:39:52, Mark Young 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).
>>>>>>>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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Give us some analysis since you have looked at the game to back up your
>>>>>>argument.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I will take that challenge that you can beat a top chess program. And we will
>>>>>>make it a short 10 game match at blitz time controls or any time controls you
>>>>>>want. I have many years playing programs online, and you will find my opening
>>>>>>book does not have many holes in it like 2 Na3. So you will need to outplay it,
>>>>>>in the middle and endgame to win.
>>>>>
>>>>>I didn't say that I'm experienced enough to beat a program in match. But it's a
>>>>>matter of training. I'm not interested in that.
>>>>>But ask Eduard Nemeth. I'm sure he can beat a top chess program in a 10 game
>>>>>match.
>>>>
>>>>Sorry I just took you at your word:
>>>>
>>>>"After reading his articles I
>>>>could beat Shredder 5 without much effort (my rating about 1900)."
>>>
>>>Did I say that I can beat it every time? Did I say I can beat it with black?
>>>But I don't think I can beat an IM or GM even one time.
>>
>>And that is my exact point, it is easy to exploit the computer when you can
>>control what the computer plays, how it plays etc. Not exactly tournament
>>conditions is it!?
>>
>No, not exactly tournament conditions.
>But to repeat it again. You have to play different against computers than
>against humans. Do you agree?

It can only help, if you can do it.

>You have to keep positions closed. That's not easy.

correct, some people think that doing this is a walk in the park.

But you can practise how to
>play against computers. But that needs time. And the IM's and GM'S don't do this

How do you know this? This is just a guess.

>because they earn money for playing humans. So of course they're not that
>experienced in playing computers than in playing humans.

We don't know how much experiece the players have, do you know for sure??


>If they practised like Eduard does they would win much more. But they don't. Of
>course they don't.

You are saying this as fact, you may be right or just wrong.

>
>>BTW: Players with 1900 ratings and lower have beaten and drawn GMs and IMs
>>before.
>>
>>>>
>>>>BTW Where is the analysis to back up your aguments about how poor the IM played!
>>>
>>>Black has in this kind of positions 3 main goals: playing b5, d5 and f5. Agree?
>>>Without problems he could play b5 and f5. White didn't achieve anything. So IMO
>>>there must be something wrong. Nf3 doesn't fit in this position, it belongs to
>>>e2.



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.