Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:11:05 08/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 18, 2002 at 22:05:53, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 18, 2002 at 21:51:35, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 18, 2002 at 12:48:02, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>On August 18, 2002 at 10:38:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>>How would you figure that? Deep Thought produced a 2650 rating over 25 >>>>consecutive 40/2hr games against GM players. Anybody else done that yet? >>>>Not that I have seen. >>>> >>> >>>Deep Thought was a great piece of HW/SW for it's time. Just a few observations >>>when comparing to today's program: >>> >>>1. DT did that aginst GM's with average ELO of 2475 (not very strong for GM's). >>> >>>2. DT played against GM's that had far less experience (none) using >>>anti-computer tatics. >>> >>>3. There are a lot of tatical/strategic holes in DT games that modern >>>commercial programs do not make. >>> >>>4. Today's programs would crush DT. >>> >>>5. The GM's that DJ, DF, CT, Rebel, Hiarcs, The King have played recently would >>>crush DT. >>> >>>6. DT would have no chance in a match with a 2700 GM (today) that had 100 games >>>of preparation, Rebel played this GM even for 4 games. >>> >>>7. I am pretty sure I could crush DT today. >>> >>>Chris >> >> >>I can't prove anything about deep thought, but I'll offer you a chance to >>put up or shut up on point 7. Deep Thought easily beat Cray Blitz every time >>we played (except for the first, where we could have won had we not run into >>a serious bug). Cray Blitz waxed Crafty in a 10 game match last year. >>That means _you_ should be able to wax crafty on my quad xeon easily if you >>could crush deep thought. >> >>Let me know when you are ready to "take the test". >> >>I don't believe you can do it for a minute... >> >>But the ball is in your court to accept the challenge... > >1)Deep thought did not beat the same cray blitz that beated crafty. >The cray blitz that beated crafty could search more nodes per second >thanks to better hardware. Where is this coming from? We played deep though thru 1994. Cray hasn't come out with anything new since then, in the super-computer arena... > >2)The time control of the games crafty-cray blitz was not 120/40 and I suspect >that at 120/40 crafty could do better thanks to better search rules(cray blitz >used R=1 when Crafty is using R=2/3 for null move pruning) The games were blitz, because I could not possibly play such long games on that machine.. But Chris didn't specify a time control. If he can crush DT at standard, then he should do well at blitz.... > >3)Winning is also not transitive so even if you were right it was not a proof. > It is a pretty good indicator here. Computers are not that dissimilar to each other. If he could "crush" DT, then he could "crush" most any computer today. I don't believe it... >4)The result btween deep thought and cray blitz does not prove that deep thought >was better. It doesn't prove that they were equal, and it doesn't prove CB was better. I don't know about you, but I can only draw one conclusion myself... > >Junior was leading 5-0 against Fritz and lost the match 14-12 so using a small >number of games when in one of them cray blitz could win is not a convincing >evidence. > >Uri For _this_ discussion it is good enough since at worst, they might be pretty close, and that really wasn't the case as I certainly know. I simply don't like nonsense statements/claims from people with absolutely no hope of backing up their statements with anything concrete... This is just another example of that... I'd be willing to play him on a single pentium pro 200 cpu. I know how well Crafty Plays on that hardware... at 40/2, so he'd better be an IM at least to think about "crushing it"...
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.