Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 05:03:08 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 ? No. Improved search and improved chess knowledge make nowadays programs way better than the programs of 1990-1995. >Doubtful. > > >>No way to stop it. >> >>No suprise Kasparov lost against Deep Blue. > >It was a surprise because he is clearly better. That was what I thought too in 1997. Maybe a 20 ply search plus some limited but smart chess knowledge is good enough to beat the world champion in a match. My above statistic implies it. Maybe we (the programmers) just have underestimated the power of search and what it does to human players. Something else, there is a new development / tendency among grandmasters. They state, "you can sinn against every chess rule as long as you calculate it right". Ring a bell? Ed >>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
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.