Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Computers vs. Humans - meaningless?

Author: Tanya Deborah

Date: 23:12:08 03/25/02

Go up one level in this thread


On March 25, 2002 at 18:02:20, Joshua Lee wrote:

>You make a good point, Nigel short for instance was well over 100elo less than
>Kasparov, yet he was able to make it to a match and win one game on top of
>drawing quite a few. Kasparov won ofcourse but the point is that The best
>players lose, and even though you are 100 point underdog, you can win.
>I wouldn't count Kramnik out against Deep Fritz just yet as Kramnik is alot
>Stronger and i have yet to see him lose to Gulko. If someone can find one game
>do share. Also GM's , IM's and Master's Get smacked around all the time by
>Crafty yet I doubt Hyatt would say that his Program even on the fastest machines
>out there plays 100% over 2500. That really is the argument if Van Wely lost two
>games then therefore Rebel is as Strong. Rebel Lost two games as well and in
>both Losses Rebel Did NOT play 2500 Level chess, if so it wouldn't have lost.
>Weeks prior people said Van Wely Sucks because he lost to some 2500elo GM well
>last time i checked a GM only Beat's IM's 3 out of 5 Games so obviously the GM
>Knows Something that his opponent doesn't. Since the IM would win those 2 games
>does that mean he is as strong as the GM? The ratings might also have serious
>flaws , when Kramnik has a 2800+ elo and Fischer in 1972 was 2780 (he dropped 5
>after the WC) do you really think that Kramnik is Stronger than Fischer at his
>peak? So on the same note 2697elo Van wely might only be 2500 who knows??
>
>Blitz games are great at showing how strong a computer is tactically but 40/2 is
>a better time control, other than that What if any of these GM's took on any top
>program in a correspondence game? IM Mike Valvo took on Deep Thought and won
>both his games even though Deep Thought was looking at more positions than
>Deep Blue did in 40/2 against Kasparov!




I do not think that Deep Thought was looking more positions per second than Deep
Blue did in 1997 against Kasparov. Deep Blue can see 200.000.000 positions in a
second, and i think that Deep Thought only can see 2.000.000 positions per
second.  There was a huge difference!! :-)

Tanya.

>
>Computers are Stronger than Most Master's and some Grandmasters but I think
>there is alot of fine tuning still to be done seeing how Rebel was lost within
>16 moves!



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.