Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 11:10:28 04/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2002 at 13:28:28, Chris Carson wrote: >On April 17, 2002 at 13:23:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 17, 2002 at 12:19:15, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>On April 17, 2002 at 10:58:13, Terry McCracken wrote: >>> >>>>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. >>> >>>My rating is in my profile. It is nowhere near 2800. You have posted your >>>opinion on short vs long tactics in this and other threads, I wonder if you >>>follow the "need to be 2800 to know" rule for yourself? My opinion is just >>>that. If you do not like it, I can live with that. >>> >>>> >>>>Kasparov and Kramnik say todays' programmes on top PC's are not 2800+ in the >>>>tactical arena. >>> >>>Well, Kramnik recently said that Fritz 7 on 8-processors "definitely be over >>>2800 in its Elo performance". Last time I checked, that was ELO 2800+ and I >>>believe it to be higher in tactics than in positional play. >>>See: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=255 >>> >>>I doubt you can support your statement with a more recent Kramnik quote. >>> >> >>Just as surely as I believe that the statement by Kramnik is pure pre-match >>hyperbole, having nothing to do with facts at all. As Kasparov has stated >>although again, I would take _his_ statements with a grain of salt as well as >>everybody has an agenda in this circumstance... >> >>But forget the 2800+ stuff. It ain't gonna happen... > >I agree with you. GM Kramnik will win easily. I was responding to the person >above, not sure why you answered? > >>Yes you were, but I agree with Robert, alot of hype. I've it read all and conclude, Kramnik is good at promoting the match, it's important to get people really interested in "Computer vs Man" once again, then procceed to trounce the daylights out of the machine!:o) But I suspect he'll put on a good show playing it safe with many Black draws to secure the win and the $1,000,000 USD:) Sorry for bring up rating etc. and yes I read your profile your an expert, a good player. I just get frustrated with all the hype. You do some interesting stuff even if I don't fully concur with your opinions. I think CTF is wearing off on me! Yuck! So forgive my remark if you can? It was inappropriate. Terry >> >> >> >>>> >>>>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.