Author: Mike S.
Date: 12:42:32 07/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2001 at 12:35:07, K. Burcham wrote: >i am still trying to define my opinion on this subject. >(...) >but i would like to see a list of GM levels defined in detail. >maybe about six different levels of GM defined, and detailed, how a GM is >expected to play in each level. including expected blunders per game. What do you mean by "GM levels"... rating range (i.e. 2550...2600)? It looks difficult to me to predict the number of blunders. A player can blunder less often, but play 2 or 3 sub-optimal moves in between... another player who blunders more often (in total) can still be the stronger player. Although I would of course prefer to apply the same criteria to humans and computers (which would mean only the success in games counts), there may be an alternative. If somebody could create a complete (or near to complete) catalogue of (a) tactical ability, (b) openings knowledge, (c) opening skills, etc. etc., resulting in a comprehensive GM test suite. But it is impossible, because we know that things like positional play (or even strategical behaviour) are very difficult to be tested by test positions. So I'm afraid we do not have an alternative to determine GM strenght by gameplay success only. Judgement by the results. A computer has GM strength, if it is able to achieve GM performance results (wins/draws/losses). Regards, M.Scheidl
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.