Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Are we comparing Apples to oranges or....

Author: Otello Gnaramori

Date: 09:57:06 08/01/02

Go up one level in this thread


On August 01, 2002 at 11:58:46, Chris Carson wrote:

>On August 01, 2002 at 11:47:35, GuyHaworth wrote:
>
>>Did Hiarcs do enough to earn a GM norm, had it been carbon rather than silicon?
>>
>>Does FIDE acknowledge such achievements, or not?
>>
>>How can Hiarcs (or any engine) accumulate norms over time ... by proving that it
>>is the same program that accumulated the previous norms ... given that ...
>>
>>Hardware/software combinations have a habit of evolving and might ... to quote a
>>phrase ... go down as well as up.
>>
>>g
>
>GM norms are only for humans.  FIDE will not allow any computer to play in FIDE
>sanctioned events.  Tiger, Junior, Fritz, Hiarcs, Rebel and the King all have
>very good (2600 and 2700, norm strength) results.
>
>SW Versions and HW are important.  The SSDF list is a very good reference and
>Tony's page provides Human vs Computer results as well.


Dear Chris,
I'm back in the forum after a long absence.
I was wondering if in this long discussed debate are we just comparing apples to
oranges ( as many people think) or are we hitting against the human proudness
that doesn't admit to be beaten by a piece of "hot silicon" running at tot Ghz.

My Best,
Otello



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.