Author: Robert Henry Durrett
Date: 14:34:42 05/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 21, 2002 at 15:40:33, Marc van Hal wrote: >On May 21, 2002 at 13:22:42, Ed Panek wrote: > >>On May 21, 2002 at 13:01:14, José Carlos wrote: >> >>>On May 21, 2002 at 12:34:39, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On May 21, 2002 at 12:20:52, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 21, 2002 at 11:07:46, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 21, 2002 at 10:13:29, K. Burcham wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>The answer is as simple as clear. >>>>>> >>>>>>They can use programs to analyze games with from other GMs >>>>>>and themselves. They can use it to analyze variations from their >>>>>>openings preparation with. >>>>>> >>>>>>But they can't learn from it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>What about tactically, can a player less than 2400 learn a few tricks from the >>>>>best programs? >>>>> >>>>>Jorge >>>> >>>>GMs know tactically more than programs, so you can analyze with them, >>>>but not learn from them. The computer doesnt 'show' a new pattern concept >>>>to you. So you don't learn from the computer something. You can learn >>>>yourself only when analyzing with computers, that's why i say you can't >>>>learn FROM the computer. >>> >>> I disagree, Vincent. You can learn from the computer. It is the computer that >>>can't teach you. >>> No matter from what, human beings spend the whole life learning. From >>>everything. You learn geology from stones, zoology from animals, physics from >>>the planets and stars. >>> They don't teach you anything. It's _you_ that observe, make a theory, test it >>>and draw conclusions. You can do exactly the same from a computer. You play >>>against it; it wins; you study the game; guess why you lost; play again; maybe >>>you force the same opening and change a move or a plan... Finally, you draw >>>conclusions. And your source of information is, in that case, Fritz!!! :) >>> >>> José C. >> >> >> Learning, IMHO is a set of exercises with a known objective. Although it can be >>a vague objective ( learning about women) or a defined objective (how to >>determine the volume of that vase), the end result is a pattern that can be >>followed the next time this information is needed with relative sucess. >> >> >> For example; A Gm plays the same GM over and over again constantly losing. >>Through time if he is truly "learning" he should be able to draw more often and >>eventually start winning assuming the other GM has "Learning=off" in his ini >>file :) >> Is this Gm now better than he was before? Has he learned from the other GM? >>Will bouncing a tennis ball against a wall make you a better tennis player? Will >>it make you a better racketball player? Will you learn how to hit a ball? >> >> >> In closing I think that GM's _can_ learn from playing computers in a general >>sense. >> >>Ed > >Well ofcourse they can learn from a chessprogram they even can learn from the >mistakes it makes. >It only is more easy for a human to point out where it went wrong. This sounds right. If I were given a choice between having Fritz on the latest computer for my tutor or having a real live human GM for my tutor, which do you expect I would prefer? Bob D. >Which most of the time is in an earlier stage of the game then the chessprogram >will play a diferent move. >And they are in many cases more tactical as a human >Pointing too the mate search of a chessprogram >which is much deeper then most Human players can see. >But in the creating of a real tactctical plan humans are still superior above >chessprograms. >Also in evaluating the position (Clear,Unclear,slide advantage,big advantage and >how to improve or keep this advantage in the most optimal way >Also many times games with the same kind of idea do help humans to make their >plans.) >Or in otherwords the learning abilety of a human is superior. >And Amir wants to compensate this with a better evaluation. >But there is maybe a methode to improve this. >Just givving the chessprogrammers something to think about. >Regards Marc van Hal
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.