Author: Omid David
Date: 05:10:10 07/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2002 at 07:36:08, GuyHaworth wrote: > >Deep Blue II beat Kasparov fair and square ... GK should not imply otherwise if >he is. > >However, he is probably correct in saying that silicon chess players are not yet >as good as carbon ones. > >The misguided impression that computers are now better than the best humans has, >in the recent past, arguably subtracted interested from: > >a) computer-computer chess > >b) computer-human chess, and maybe even > >c) human-human chess. > >Maybe FIDE, the ICGA and Kasparov together should correct that impression, and >jointly declare that: > >a) the comparison of the best human and computer chess players is still an >'open question' and that It's not an 'open question'! as Smirin recently proved, humans are still far superior than computers. Kasparov's loss was a terrible bad luck (+ dirty tricks on IBM's behalf). I strongly believe that all chess programs are dump, not being able to see some of the obvious positional elements in a position. If a chess program like Junior or Fritz loses 5 games in 100 to me (2250 Elo), it means that computers are by no means superior to humans. (I certainly won't be able to beat a 2700 Elo Human 5 times in 100 matches!) P.S. I'm saying this despite my being a chess programmer. > >b) they will work together to facilitate further human-computer events > > >An official recognition by FIDE that ... > >computers, via databases, the web, chess-servers, chess-engines, and events >involving computers, have added value to the world of chess > >... would be most welcome. > > >g
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.