Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 09:33:25 04/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 06, 2002 at 11:44:48, Uri Blass wrote:
>On April 06, 2002 at 11:11:08, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>On April 06, 2002 at 10:31:06, Otello Gnaramori wrote:
>>
>>>On April 06, 2002 at 05:03:29, Sune Fischer wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I am one of those ignorant people that have some doubts about the true strength
>>>>of the programs ;)
>>>>Let me explain why...
>>>>We all agree that in tactics nothing beats the computers, but how good are they
>>>>at the positional level?
>>>
>>>Not to be boring, but I would like to stress that tactics is way more important
>>>in chess than positional knowledge for winning purposes I mean...
>>
>>Maybe it is an irrelevant example, but my little engine is now seeing two plies
>>deeper than the previous versions. I have been playing matches against TSCP and
>>Ozwald043, it has a good positive score, so in engine-engine matches is now
>>clearly stronger.
>>However I have done nothing about the evaluation, and all you have to do, is to
>>wait for it to castle, sacrifice a few pawns so you have a clear shot at its
>>king, and you can just roll it over!
>>Point is, it is not playing any stronger against humans as far as I can tell,
>>humans just go for the king, and it doesn't begin to defend itself until it's
>>within its horizon, which is often too late.
>
>I disagree
>if it can see 2 ply deeper then it is stronger against humans.
>
>Not all the humans just go for the king and even if they do it they can expect
>better defence.
Try playing on the servers, humans have a way of simplifying things, they break
up the h-file and go for the mate :)
It has been hovering in the 1650-1700 range constantly, I couldn't help but
smile when I saw this game today:
[Event "Xboard"]
[Site "FICS"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Date "04/06/02"]
[White "ChessCraft v.113"]
[Black "FRATERANTONIUS"]
[WhiteElo "1679"]
[BlackElo "1258"]
[PlyCount "39"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[TimeControl "5+0"]
1.d4 d5
2.c4 c6
3.cxd5 cxd5
4.Nf3 f5
5.Nc3 e6
6.e3 a6
7.Bd3 Nc6
8.O-O Nf6
9.Qa4 Bd6
10.Bd2 O-O
11.Nb5 Bxh2
12.Kxh2 Bd7
13.Nd6 Ng4
14.Kg1 Rf6
15.Nxb7 Qe8
16.Nc5 Qh5
17.Nxd7 Rh6
18.Nh4 Qxh4
19.Nf6 gxf6
20.Qxc6 Qh1++
That's how you do it, and he was only 1258! :)
Here is another perle:
[Event "Xboard"]
[Site "FICS"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Date "04/06/02"]
[White "ChessCraft v.113"]
[Black "Tridge"]
[WhiteElo "1673"]
[BlackElo "1436"]
[PlyCount "34"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[TimeControl "10+0"]
1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Nf6
4.d3 d6
5.Ng5 Be6
6.Bxe6 fxe6
7.Nxe6 Qe7
8.Nxf8 Rxf8
9.O-O Kd7
10.Nc3 Nd4
11.Bg5 h6
12.Nd5 Qe6
13.Nxf6 gxf6
14.Bxh6 Rfg8
15.Be3 Qh3
16.g3 Rgh8
17.Qg4 Qxg4
18.Bxd4 {I resigned on behalf of ChessCraft}
It is just too greedy and doesn't see the danger, better extensions and more
eval will help no doubt.
>>The top programs probably have this snag fixed, but there might be other similar
>>weaknesses that one can find.
>>It takes some time and elo to find these, but I bet there are
>>openings/middelgames/endings that computers in general play weaker than others,
>>it is a matter of "research".
>
>There are also opening and middlegame that known humans players play weaker and
>it is a matter of research and I believe that if 2400 players are going to buy
>gulko and play against him in order to find his weaknesses then Gulko is going
>to get bad results against humans.
But the humans do prepare special openings against each other, they seem
ignorant about exploting the programs the same way.
What I mean is, they are trained to play against humans, they focus and develop
their game to be at their best against humans, they do not train for computers
in the same way.
>I think that using the option to buy the program in order to learn it's
>weaknesses is unfair way to find it's rating and the only fair way is if the
>program is not commercial and humans can learn about it's weaknesses only by
>watching games of it against other players.
They could learn by studying games, like the 24 game match I proposed.
If there is a weakness, I think the GMs will pick up on it quickly.
>I believe that if some sponsor decides to give every human who win against Gulko
>in a tournament 1500$ bonus for a win and 500$ for a draw then the rating of
>gulko is going to go down so even if 2500 humans can beat programs after serious
>preperation it does not mean that the real rating of programs is less than 2500.
>
>The only way to find the real rating of computers is to give humans the same
>money for beating them as they get for beating other humans and not doing the
>programs public.
>
>Changes in the program between the games should be also allowed.
>
>Uri
I agree, and speculation will continue until it happens.
-S.
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.