Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 08:16:25 08/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2002 at 15:11:24, Jeff White wrote: >>there sure is nothing magical to "24", but i think it's clear that longer >>matches are more desirable from a statistical point of view. > >Sure, thats exactly why I wanted to know how come it's never happened. I would >think that programmers of the top programs would like to see this as well. As I >said in a previous post, short matches mean nothing. A six game match, if you >lose once, all you have to do is draw the rest of the games to back in to a >victory. A 24 game match, you may have to win a little more than 1 or 2 to win >the match. The one I'd REALLY like to see would be Kasparov against the best >program in the world in a first to win 6 draws not counting. But thats somewhat >of a fantasy. > >Regards, >Jeff I think Kramnik's playing style and temperment are more suited to getting good results against computers than are Kasparov's. Plus, he might be a little more willing to undertake such a match. (I know less about Ponomariov's style, but he might be more willing still.) I hope such a match with one of the top humans really can be negotiated soon. If I were rich, I'd sponsor 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.