Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 12:49:15 04/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2002 at 15:43:08, Chris Carson wrote: >On April 29, 2002 at 15:39:25, Roy Eassa wrote: > >>On April 29, 2002 at 15:36:44, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>On April 29, 2002 at 15:20:00, Roy Eassa wrote: >>> >>>>On April 29, 2002 at 15:17:37, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 29, 2002 at 13:56:58, Roy Eassa wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>When computers lose to GMs, it's *occasionally* due to insufficient depth that >>>>>>could be cured by doubling the time. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>More often than occasionally IMHO, in blitz levels comps tend to fall in >>>>>anticomputer traps, and we have Eduard here that can teach some lessons about. >>>>> >>>>>w.b.r. >>>>>Otello >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Agreed, but adding less than 1 ply wouldn't change this very much, IMHO. >>> >>>Actually, this is a very good example. A person with preparation and time >>>pressure can win (quite often) over the machine. >>> >>>More time, faster HW, and or better SW can help the comp improve performance >>>(avoid the trap). >>> >>>In fact, less than one ply extra can add quite a bit to the performance of the >>>machine if that little extra gets the comp to the next ply, important at fast >>>time controls. >> >> >>Agreed, but in the majority of cases (certainly NOT 100% of the cases) the extra >>time gives a bigger boost the the human than to the computer, IMHO. > >Agreed, to the average person, not to the strong/prepared/professional human. Well, at least we've narrowed down the disagreement to the "strong/prepared/professional human." :-) I'm pretty sure that even for those people the results show a consistent improvement against computers at progressively longer time controls. But I'm too lazy to search for definitive proof. (And since we are talking about the "majority" here, there will always be counterexamples.)
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.