Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 14:05:33 01/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 22, 2002 at 15:41:43, Roy Eassa wrote: >On January 22, 2002 at 11:37:33, Mark Young wrote: > >>On January 22, 2002 at 10:29:04, Joshua Lee wrote: >> >>>Chess Tiger is supposed to be best for Comp vs Comp games >>>Is it the best for Computer vs Human? If not How do these two compete against >>>one another? Shouldn't the Program that is Best against other Computers have >>>something in it's code to help it against Humans? I know some do i just am >>>curious as to the opinions out there. >>> >>>Thanks >> >>I see no reason why the best Comp vs Comp program can not also be the best >>playing humans. In the case with Chess Tiger, Chess Tiger is the strongest >>proven program playing humans. (IMO) > > >There is certainly no reason it CANNOT; however, there is a common belief that >what makes it the best against computers is very fast/deep tactical >calculations, which is where _all_ (decent) apps are better than humans already. > On the other hand, since computers already outdo humans in this area, it is >often stated that programs that put extra focus on positional factors -- even at >the cost of some tactical speed (i.e., poorer results versus other programs) -- >have the best balance of factors for doing well against top human grandmasters. That would explain why the highest rated program in CCT4 (Hiarcs) had a higher ICC rating than the other computer programs, but it clearly hasn't dominated the other chess programs.
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.