Author: Albert Silver
Date: 03:42:25 01/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2002 at 06:33:26, Amir Ban wrote:
>On January 28, 2002 at 06:12:53, Ed Schröder wrote:
>
>>>Will TACTIC's eventually REFUTE! Positional play?
>>
>>In the end yes.
>>
>>It is my (new) opinion that the nature of chess is just search.
>>
>>Elo progress of (professional) chess programs...
>>
>>1990 - elo 2000 (average depth 6-8) (TC 40/2h)
>>1995 - elo 2300 (average depth 8-10)
>>2000 - elo 2500 (average depth 11-13)
>>2002 - elo 2600 (average depth 12-14)
>>
>
>This begs the question, because the programs are newer and play positionally
>different. Will a 1990/1995 program perform 2600+ on today's hardware ?
>Doubtful.
>
>
>>No way to stop it.
>>
>>No suprise Kasparov lost against Deep Blue.
>
>It was a surprise because he is clearly better.
>
>>
>>The sad future: it will be in the headlines when a grandmaster occasionally will
>>win from a computer.
>>
>
>If this will happen due to positionally outplaying will you also consider it sad
>?
>
>Amir
I don't think he meant it would be sad they won, but that this would be
considered news. In any case, I'm afraid I agree with him on the nature of
chess. I think that positional play is just extremely deep and refined tactical
play. Since we approach them differently, we regard them as different, but that
is still how I regard them. Notice how already some elements of knowledge that
were necessary in older programs are removed as the search makes up for it.
Naturally this isn't the whole trend, but it does say something.
Albert
Albert
This page took 0.01 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.