Author: Mark Young
Date: 04:57:58 07/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2001 at 07:39:19, odell hall wrote: >On July 23, 2001 at 06:16:44, Mark Young wrote: > >>On July 22, 2001 at 14:19:22, Joshua Lee wrote: >> >>>On July 22, 2001 at 09:13:39, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>> >>>>On July 22, 2001 at 09:02:54, Joshua Lee wrote: >>>> >>>>>You've never read GM Kramnik's statements about a Match with Fritz have you? >>>>>Basically if a GM want's a Draw then he will get one. Heubner hasn't been very >>>>>active untill recently so this may be a little warm up. But none the less he >>>>>should've crushed fritz seeing how it only deserves a 2612 rating if it were on >>>>>hardware several times faster than it was. Hat's off to Fritz and it's >>>>>programmers. >>>> >>>>I think Huebner did what he could to draw, nothing more nothing less, i was not >>>>impressed with either DF or Huebner. Huebner was affraid to lose, and excanged >>>>pieces like his life depended on it BOOOORING. DF 2612 on a dual 1gig, CT14.0 >>>>2782 on an 800mhz maby the wrong program is to face Kramnik??? >>>> >>>>Regards >>>>Jonas >>> >>>Results like the one's you mention prove that this is not an exact science. >>>while DF can Draw like a GM and CT can beat a GM or two maybe 3 (i didn't follow >>>the match) I seriously doubt that Computers are GM's in every phase of the game >>>Kasparov said DB "The computer was like a 2800 player in the endgame", i think >>>the DB team said they had all 6 piece and some 8 piece endgame tablebases but i >>>may be mis quoting the team This is a hugh statement coming from one of the best >>>endgame players (Karpov and Smyslov helped with Encyclopedia of Chess Endgames >>>which may not say much lots of errors however Smyslov's Rook Endings is supposed >>>to be really good) >>> >>>So Computers play over 2000 in the endgame for sure >>>Chess Tiger and other programs when it comes to tactics will play over 2000 >>>Deep Fritz can make GM draws but even experts 2000-2199 have beaten GM's on >>>occasion so this does NOT say much >> >>The day you have a GM or IM say yes it's as >>>good as me or it is better then i think this confusion will be over. >> >>The confusion is over then, some players have already made such statments to >>this effect. > > > Mark if God Himself were to come down to earth and declare Computers to be >Grandmaster strength, these people here would still say the aren't, buttom line >is no amount of logic, reason, or results will sway them because it is an >emotional issue with many, some can't accept that computers can do something as >well as humans, so your probally wasteing your time. It seems like common sense >after all these sensational results, but like I said logic doesn't apply here. I once read and I agree with it...computer chess is not man vs. machine, it is man vs man. So I do not have this emotional issue to bias my judgement.
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.