Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:55:15 07/25/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 2001 at 08:50:05, Christopher R. Dorr wrote: >No not at all (re: Karpov hanging a full piece to Christiansen in the opening), >but computers *do* tend to make some positional howlers *much* more frequently >than a human GM. For a human GM, it's often much easier to spot and exploit a >huge positional error, than a tactical one that is deep. It would be quite sound >match strategy against a computer to wait for it to make on of these abysmal >positional blunters, then smash it, rather than try to beat it up head on, when >one doesn't have a clear advantage. > >Chris The problem here is that the "weaker humans" don't realize that you can have a positionally won game, but still lose to a deep tactic. It is certainly possible that in 10-20 years, computers will still play horrible positional chess but win every game because they _still_ are able to out- tactic the humans in spite of having a technically lost position. We are seeing a lot of that today already. Hubner gave one way to try to combat that. Play safely and wait for a mistake. I suspect we will see that from Kramnik except that when the machine makes a mistake, he will jump on it, where Hubner did not...
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.