Author: Uri Blass
Date: 05:14:51 01/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2002 at 08:03:08, Ed Schröder wrote: >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. I believe that this was not the surprise that Amir meant. The surprise is based on the impression that top program of today on good hardware are better than deeper blue. I can say that I was not surprised in 1997 when deeper blue beated kasparov. I was surprised only later when I analyzed the games and got the impression that the top programs of today are better than deeper blue. 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.