Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:34:15 12/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 04, 2001 at 09:46:22, Christopher R. Dorr wrote: >Again, this brings us to the issue of 'true' computer strength. I Have the >next-to-latest versions of Tiger, Rebel, and Fritz. All of these could likely >'hang' with a 2550-2600 GM. But is it fair to say that is their 'true' strength? >I'm only a USCF 2150 or so, but I have been able to draw all of these programs >*much* more often that I 'should' be able to against a 2600 player. How many games did you play against 2600 players in order to know? > >I've gotten very proficient at playing for a draw against programs. I have blitz >draws against Crafty online. When you play for a draw at the outset, these >programs do *not* win nearly as often as would an equivalent human GM. They >often fall for things like pawn sacs to get to an opposite-color bishop ending, >or pawn sacs to reach dead drawn R+P endings, or even pawn sacs to get to drawn >K+P endings (he has 2 connected passers, but I have one protected one that he >can't move away from). > >In a thread on this earlier, a couple other expert/NM level players expressed >the same thing. I have a very good friend who is a USCF 2100 who was able to >draw Fritz 5 almost at will. Fritz5 is not the best software and he had a lot of time to learn it There is Fritz7 and it may be more interesting to know his results against Fritz7. Over several dozen games with muliple 'GM' >programs, I was able to get enough draws to extrapolate a USCF 2400-2450 >performance rating at G/15 and G/30 on a Celeron 800. > >So which is it? Are these programs the 2600s that they look like when they plan >Anand, or are they the USCF 2450s that they look like when they play me? One's a >strong GM, the other a weak IM. > >I am certainly *not* saying these programs are weak. But I am saying that they >do not conform to the typical performance pattern of a human, hence saying >*either* that they are strong GMs or weak IMs is misleading. Eventually, this >artifact will disappear as they become capable of playing GMs at the 3000 level, >but for now, it really isn't fair to say that Program X is a strong GM any more >than it is to say the same program is only a weak IM. It is not fair to say that they are weak IM's. Humans can choose the tournament that they play when they get their rating. Choosing for programs tournaments when their performance is bad is not fair. I see no problem with choosing tournaments when they can perform better. I am also interested to know the performance of humans who get the draws against programs when they play against GM's. I suspect that the same style is going to help them to earn rating points also against GM's. The last tournament when tiger14(anti human mode) played against humans proved that it is not so easy to draw against programs(tiger beated most of the players and they were clearly better than 2150 USCF rating). 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.