Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 07:58:13 04/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2002 at 09:07:04, Chris Carson wrote: >On April 17, 2002 at 03:33:12, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On April 17, 2002 at 03:04:52, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>On April 17, 2002 at 01:31:51, Joe Little wrote: >>> >>>>On April 16, 2002 at 18:28:36, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 16, 2002 at 17:19:13, martin fierz wrote: >>>>>>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. >>>>> >>>>>I think that chess is made over 90% of tactics... so 2700+ is not an optimistic >>>>>evaluation. >>>>> >>>>>Regards, >>>>>Otello >>>> >>>> >>>> I agree, seems pretty obvious to me but who am I? >>> >>>Yes Chess is 90% tactics at least, maybe even 95%! But that would still only >>>mean that programmes play around 2700 level in tactics only, not in positional >>>play and planning, which is _fundamental_ and till a programme aquires this >>>skill in won't be a _complete_ Grandmaster. >>> >>>Planning is many years away, positional play is advanced a long ways but still >>>needs improvement. >>> >>>Computers will play 2800+ in tactics long before it can actually manage deep >>>positional play, let alone planning. >> >>I think that computers are 2800+ in tactic even today and it is not something >>about the future. >> >>tactics is not only long combinations but mainly short combinations. >>No human can see every short combination that programs has no chance to miss. >> >>Uri > >I agree with you Uri. I would add that computers still have some problems with >chess knowledge, however they make up for it with tactics. I would also add >that Planning and Preparation are the keys (or just plain luck) to beating the >comps. Do you have any additional ideas on beating the comps? > >I also agree with your evaluation on opening preparation. I see no ethical >reason why a program must use a known book. GM's get to use any >book/preparation they choose, it is only fair that the comps get to change their >books. (This discussion was in a different part of this thread). What's your rating Chris as you need to be 2800 to know whether or not Comps./Programmes have attained this level of sophistication. Kasparov and Kramnik say todays' programmes on top PC's are not 2800+ in the tactical arena. They miss too much in long range tactics due to the "Horizon Effect". Terry
This page took 0.01 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.