Author: Sune Larsson
Date: 03:45:38 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 06:02:36, Martin Schubert wrote: >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. I think both you Martin and Uri are right here. Tiger followed the book to 9.-Rb8, then the IM played a slightly dubious move (IMO) 10.Bf4?!. Much easier was 10.d4 but I guess that he tried to keep the center closed. Any way chosen, black has a lot of possibilities in these positions, contrary to the first game which ended in a draw. Sune
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.