Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 10:41:58 04/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2002 at 13:29:56, Mark Young wrote: >On April 15, 2002 at 13:27:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 15, 2002 at 12:49:59, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>On April 15, 2002 at 11:52:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On April 15, 2002 at 08:56:27, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 15, 2002 at 08:17:04, Claudio A. Amorim wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>So, are these the programs supposed to play at a 2700 level? Sure, they win many >>>>>>games against strong humans, but... Where is their chess competency? Shredder´s >>>>>>errors against Smirin were so elementary that they would not fit well in a >>>>>>strong club player´s blitz game. >>>>> >>>>>Let's not go crazy over ONE game! we need to ask these questions after the >>>>>match, also you can not say "So, are these the programs supposed to play at a >>>>>2700 level?" when this is a games based on one programs performance! >>>>>Other than that i agree, it was not pretty... >>>>> >>>>>Regards >>>>>Jonas >>>> >>>> >>>>I think the thing that troubles _some_ of us greatly is this question: >>>> >>>>"Can you name any GM that would play a single game that looks as bad as >>>> that one?" >>> >>>Kasparov (2800+) vs DBII the final game. >> >> >>Wasn't even close. that game had nothing to do with not understanding >>king safety or anything else. It was just a tactical error resulting from >>(supposedly) playing the moves in the wrong order. > >Ivanchuk showed bad "KING SAFETY" in his loss I showed. Agreed, Ivanchuk was outplayed positionally in that game (not that I'm strong enough to fully comprehend of course). But I don't think the DEGREE to which he was outplayed was even close. > >> >>> >>>> >>>>Of course, questions like "OK, how can a program play like a 2600+ in one game >>>> then play like a 1900- in another game?" and that _is_ a good question. But >>>>as the old proverb goes, "the chain is only as strong as its weakest link." IE >>>>Smirin could lose the remainder of the games (not likely of course) and it would >>>>_still_ be difficult to call this a "GM performance" after a game like that... >>>> >>>>GMs do have bad days. But not _that_ bad. It perfectly highlighted just how >>>>weakly programs evaluate king-safety. _all_ programs...
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.