Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:14:50 04/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2002 at 17:26:52, Torstein Hall wrote: >On April 29, 2002 at 16:58:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 29, 2002 at 14:07:03, Fernando Villegas wrote: >> >>>Hi Jouski: >>>My conclusion is just this: current top programs can fight in equal or almost >>>equal terms with GM's. Yes, Smirin won, but not crushingly. It was a balanced >>>tourn with games where both sides had some chancs. If that is not equal to >>>match between two GM's, I wonder what it is. >>>In fact it is amazing that each time a GM win a program, at once people jumps >>>saying than that is a proof programs still lack what it is needed to be GM. Why? >>>Any GM can lose to any GM. Does it means the loser side is not GM? >>>I belive progam are at least middle GM's, only inferior to the top hundred o so. >>>Fernando >> >> >>at game/60, yes... > >But you have to admit that the progress of the programs are bigger than you >expected? > >game/60 is not that short timecontrol.... > >Torstein Not at all. game/60 becomes game/30 after 30 moves or so. and it becomes game/10 after 40-50 moves. That is where the computer shines. If you made it 60/60 and then 30/30 or something where there is no sudden death, then things change. But computers have been murderous at game/x time controls for 20 years now... It is just that now X is creeping down year by year. 40/2.5 used to be the FIDE time control. Then 40/2. We have now seen a WC crowned after winning a pair of blitz games... Let the computers into _that_ event and see what happens...
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.