Author: Don Dailey
Date: 08:31:42 06/05/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 1998 at 04:24:25, Danniel Corbit wrote: >One further caveat: >A "world" title based on a handful of games is really pretty meaningless >anyway. If one hundred games against each opponent were performed, we >could have some certainty. But with a tiny selection, it is just a wild >guestimate anyway. I think this is probably even more true of computer >chess than with people. I suspect that a large number of games against >a computer program are likely to reveal a flaw. The same will be true >for humans, but the humans will quickly learn and recover. Yes, I agree. The ICCA plans to make the next world championship have more rounds which is an improvement. It would be nice (but hard to arrange) if the world championship was more like the human championship. A challenger selected and then a long match played between the two. Then you could still have bragging rights to being either the "world challenger" or former world champion. - Don
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.