Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 14:34:47 07/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Bob: You are right in the sense GM does not worry too much about preparing something special againts computers, BUT the very fact you mentioned that this Ricardi guy was crushed "because he just played clasical chess" is in itself a strong way to say, perhaps without sensing it, that top programs are GM level. After all, "clasical chess" is more or less what we call chess. It is chess. So you are saying that to win a top program a GM must do an special effort to play something somewhat different from chess-chess, that they must muster special weapons, etc. Of course if they does such effort, weaknesses they will find. If they does that effort against any kind of adversary, weaknesses they will find also. So, if they find weaknesses and get better results, that will be not a proof programs are no GM level, but just that preparing againts an special adversary you get, obviously, better results. If I - around 2100-200 player- prepare myself one year to play Karpov -againts who I played a simul in my country. I was defeated but not after some fight- I am sure I could get "better" results. Say, 1/2 in 20 points. Or 1/2 in 10. But no matter how many points I could get that way, Karpov still would be Karpov. For the same token, a top program, capable of crushing GM playing clasical chess, still is a top program crushing GM in chess even if the GM get some weapons to do better the next time. In other words, the very fact GM should use special weaponry to beat them is a measure of how near or perhaps into GM level top programs could be by now. Please note that this does not means I believe Top programs are GM. I have said many times I think they are high IM. It is just a matter of looking at the other side of your reasonning. My best Fernando
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.