Author: Claudio A. Amorim
Date: 12:29:29 04/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2002 at 10:04:47, Slater Wold wrote: >On April 22, 2002 at 09:17:57, K. Burcham wrote: > >> >> >>most here have witnessed the different levels of program and hardware strength >>increases over the years. >>the programs used to be looked at as a toy, or a novelty. >>then the programs could beat a master. >>then the programs could beat a GM but with lots of losses. >>it seems now we are witnessing another phase of this growth. >>there are more GM losing to programs, but the difference is >> that the GM cannot win like he used to. now it seems we are >>going through a period of 4 out of 5, GM vs program games, being >>drawn. >> >>i feel that when someone can play 30 games against a variety >>of GM's, and draw almost every game, and occasionally win one, >>it would be very difficult for me to not call him a GM. >> >>also we know what the next logical level is here, once we get through >>this draw era. i think all here will witness the evolution of this >>next level, less draws and more wins. i think in this next level, >>it will become acceptable to all, to address programs as GM level. >>kburcham > >There are a few flaws here, I think. > >If a GM wants a draw against a computer, he gets the draw. Period. Taking >chances, and trying to get a win, is where GMs usually lose. > >This does NOT work against other GMs. I can't remember his name, but I once >heard a GM say, about Fischer, "I only wanted a draw, and yet, I resign in 20. >Everytime, the same thing. Play for draw, resign a few moves later." > >Therefore, I think the GM kind of "controls" the computer. Think about this; > >If Smirin wins, he gets a lot of money. If he draws, he gets a lot of money. >If he loses, he gets some money. > >He's going to get the easy wins, and draw every other game. Not because he >can't win, but because he cannot afford to lose. You have to take risks to win >against a computer, and those risks probably aren't worth $5k, or something to >that effect. > >Get a 2700 Elo GM, and tell him, "Beat this computer, get $1M. Draw or lose, >you get nothing." And you'll see a GM smash a computer. You have to make the >prize money ridiculous though, in order to make up for that fact that if he >loses, he doesn't get jack. > >I personally think that computers are, at their best, around 2600 Elo. Which of >course, is GM strength. But I also think that #1 - #5 in the world would make >these programs look silly. But you'll probably never see that. :( Perhaps matters will be set once for all when someone comes up with a chess computer that loves money as much as some top GMs do ;)
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.