Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:31:45 07/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2001 at 00:13:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 07, 2001 at 23:21:52, odell hall wrote: > >>> >> I really don't understand what your saying, since even on icc computers are >>performing like supergrandmasters. > > >I'm sure you don't. But when you have time, point out a single "super GM" >that loses to a 2000 player. The computers are good, no doubt. But they >are not _that_ good yet... 1)I do not know about super GM's who lost against 2000 players but I am going to be surprised if there were no cases when it happened. I know about 2 cases in Israel when GM's lost against 2000 and 2100 players at tournament time control and I am sure there are more that I do not know. In the case of the loss against the 2100 I know that everything was opening preperation. In the case of the loss against the 2000 player it was not opening preperation and the GM simply did not play well. I guess that super GM's play less games against 2000 players relative to computers and this is one of the reasons that they lose less games. 2)It is known that computers have weaknesses but it proves nothing. If a computer program scores 99% against 2000 players and 85% against GM's then I think that it is right to say that it is performing like a super GM and the fact that the super GM may get 99.9% against 2000 players does not change it because the super GM may get less against GM's. Uri
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.