Author: stuart taylor
Date: 03:50:02 05/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 2002 at 19:38:43, Fernando Villegas wrote: >On May 05, 2002 at 19:25:07, stuart taylor wrote: > >>I mean, where are we? I cannot make it out yet. >>Can we safely say that a top program of today can beat all programs from before >>1996, i.e. 1995 and below? Which program, and if so, can we say that it is due >>to true chess understanding and correctness, > > > >What is true chess understanding? Who has it? "True" is too mch a big word. It's my question too, since I'm not at GM level or the like, but it is forever being refered to in books etc. > > >or just due to greater power to >>calculate all the tactics? And even THAT maybe not, because even that might only >>be due to seeing the extra ply or so. >> But what about true chess knowledge? I mean long-term planning, and playing for >>minute advantages etc? > > >This is a realm where programs are better, no doubt, although I do not believe >that our understanding of what planning is can be used to understand that of the >programs. Well now we're getting somewhere! This is an unusual opinion I think. > > >> Can any prgram of today beat all programs until a certain year, due to that >>knowledgs alone? >> >>I feel that if a 1995 program can beat a top program of today in even one game, >>that means that there are aspects which that older program knows better than the >>new one, or why else would it win? > > >Even an average player could win a good one in some days. That does not means he >knows better. Somehow, he DID something better. But if a program does something better, it is because it is in te program, or atleast, the chance of intuition is only a question of luck/fluke. A human however can get a momentary inspiration. > >Fernando >>S.Taylor
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.