Author: Jeff White
Date: 12:00:39 08/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 19, 2002 at 15:08:00, Dann Corbit wrote: >On August 19, 2002 at 12:58:08, Jeff White wrote: > >>In a 24 game match with the time control of 2 1/2 hours for 40 moves, who wins? >>The best human player or the best computer player? In my opinion this would be >>the only true way to solve this. How come it's never been done like this before? > >Why do you imagine that 24 games will create an answer to the question? Well, probably because that was the old format for World Championship matches. Fischer-Spassky comes to mind. A couple of the Kasparov Karpov matches come to mind as well. In my opinion, a first to win 6 games, draws NOT counting would be good too, but that would probably favor a computer because you never know how long a match like that will last. Fast time controls or short game matches really prove nothing. So the only reason I suggested the 24 game match thing is that it was good enough for World Championship events, why not man-machine events as well??? >It will only raise more questions. > >There have been many man/machine matches. None of 24 games that I know of, but >there is nothing magical about the number 24. I can't think of any 24 game matches against computers either, so why not? Now I'm only talking about big time matches like the ones that are supposed to come off with Kramnik and Kasparov playing against the machines. I honestly believe that if the 2nd Deep Blue match with Kasparov would have had a 24 game format with a 2 1/2 hr for 40 moves, the outcome would have been drastically different. Regards, Jeff
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.