Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 14:42:23 04/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2002 at 17:19:13, martin fierz wrote: > >>I am still amazed that people claim the programs are low rated (although the >>number of people claiming this gets smaller), the combined TPR for the 16 games >>will be very strong. GM Smirin would need to win this match by two points just >>to bring the comps down to 2650 and some of the programs will be above that >>number and a couple below. This hw is not the fastes either, reinforcing that >>rating of 2700+ by top programs on fastest hw. > >you seem to misread the claims intentionally. i for one would never say they are >"low rated". oh, and this is rapid chess, don't forget... >computers have HUGE weaknesses, and if properly exploited, they play like >beginners. if your own rating is like 1000, you cannot see that. if it is only >about 1700 like hyatt's, you can. a program which plays a game like shredder vs. >smirin is just not GM strength. it is 3000+ in tactics and 2000- in positional >play. it may perform at GM level in tournaments, and in matches. but if a >program evaluates dead drawn positions like the ones i posted under "strange >fritz evaluations" as winning, how can you call it "GM strength"? >GM strength to me would imply that it understands that such a position is a >draw. even you can understand that it's a draw! so how come the mighty computers >can't? > >aloha > martin Martin, I think it's much easier for them to debate a misrepresentation of others' statements than the actual statements. :-)
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.