Author: Komputer Korner
Date: 05:40:06 08/05/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 1998 at 23:19:08, Ed Schröder wrote: >Hi Fernando, > >I think you are right. I already pointed this out in other postings. The >emphasis for future versions is to extend the chess engine with more >useful functions. If you have a look at the Rebel10 Diary you will see >that this is already the case and more is to come over there. > >Changing the subject. It's now about 2 weeks after the match. In the >meantime I have thought a lot about what happened on Ischia. Maybe too >early for my final thoughts and personal conclusions. I wonder where do we >stand in computer chess? > >It looks like playing against the world-top (even against 2800 players!) on >blitz and semi-blitz makes no sense anymore. Rebel played 4 blitz games >5:00 plus 5 Fischer seconds increment for each move which makes the >4 games actually 10:00 games. Then 2 games on 15:00. Result 4.5-1.5 >and believe me I never ever expected this to happen. Apparently you have >to play first to find out. > >The same counts for the 2 tournament games. Before the 2 games my >main fear was that Rebel would have been slaughtered, first positional >out-played, then slowly strangled, all in the well known Seirawan style at >Aegon but then even more effective :) > >The opposite happened. Rebel in both tournament games took the initiative >(a complete new experience for me!) had good winning chances in the >first game and some even say also in the second game, which I tend >to disagree on. > >What on earth is happening? > >I know, I know, just 2 games! > >In this respect I am really looking forward to the 6 Ferret games! It will tell >us more about the current state of computer chess. Please Fernando make sure >this new match will take place! > >One of my worries and also coming to my point, say Ferret will do well, >say a victory of 4-2. Next a 6 game match on 40/2:00 versus comp_X >and Kasparov or Anand ending in 3-3 or 4-2 in favor of comp_X. > >All speculation of course. But if it happens my worry is that it is a killer >for computer chess! My assumption is that people will lose interest as >the race on playing strength is finally decided. > >My prediction, if it happens some of us have to look for a new job :) > >- Ed - > > >>Hi Ed: >>Knowing that some people is asking you to shoot on your feet, then I dare to >>ask >>something for Rebel 11 around 2 years in advance. Besides, after seeing the >>post >>written by the presumed mummy of Sean Evans, everything is possible. >>Well, the core of my wish list is not strength but coach functions. I am >>already >>beaten 95% of the times by rebel 9 and the rest of Top programs and looking at >>an old poll, it seems I am not the only one here. So, strength is not anymore >>the issue. I don’t say you should weaken your engine or not to devote some >>time >>to improvement, OK, but I would like to see a greater effort in the coach >>functions in order, some day, to improve that 95% loses to, let us say, only >>90%. >>What I want, specifically? >>a) a coach function like that of Fritz, BUT not delivered in the setting of a >>weakened level. Coach should be present in any level, at will. >>b) after the end of the game, if on, the coach should appear and show which >>moves were the cause of defeat, explain why and show which were the good > >>moves, >>step by step >>c) after that, the coach should push the student to examine a lot of exercises >>similar to the position pattern where the mistake was committed. Of course >>this >>assumes Rebel 11 has a huge database with a thoroughly detailed number of key >>positions >>d) rebel 11 should keep in store the mistakes committed and the results of >>exercises so if in another game if a similar positions arises, the coach >>should >>warn that the player must be careful as much in a similar position he ruined a >>game, remember your exercisses, etc. >>In other words, Ed, I see a coach function operating together with normal >>game, >>not as something different. Besides, it is more rewarding and motivating to do >>some study of positions when you still are in the mood of playing chess. There >>are very good programs for learning chess, but they are somewhat boring and >>ask >>from the student an special moment to go through. That is somewhat demanding >>for >>an old fart like me, above 40 years old and in fact in the verge of 50. >>Give it a thought. Learning functions are the future. I don’t see other reason >>to purchase now a new program. Sure many guys feel like me. >>Regards >>fernando Ed don't worry about your own future. If Rebel XX becomes the best chess program/player on the planet, almost every chess player will want a copy. The people that should fear this is the professional GM. Already the ones in 11th -50th spot have a hard time making a living. The tournament invites are drying up. When computer programs become the best, why should a tournament organizer organize a human tournament when he doesn't get spectators anyway? He might as well invite computer programs. In the future the GM's will be reduced to teaching chess, but this won't happen overnight however, because the programs have a long way to go to overcome the advantage of opening preparation that the Super GM's have. -- Komputer Korner
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.