Author: James Robertson
Date: 09:43:23 08/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 15, 1998 at 21:52:31, Shaun Graham wrote: > Below is a report from I.M. Larry Kaufman on Hiarcs 6 off the ICD page. Now >he states that on a fast pentium Hiarcs 6 is GM strength. Why would he as an >Expert on chess,an international master who owns and plays the program say this, >unless he believed it to be true from his own experience? Is the author of >Hiarcs paying him to say such things(i doubt it)? Now of course we could get >some other I.M. to say the opposite, regardless though, Kaufmans testimony >increases the evidence that comps are GM strength. For the simple reason that >most I.Ms would simply like to claim that they(IMs) are stronger, that they have >the edge(now of course i haven't taken a poll, but considerable experience leads >me to believe that indeed this statement is true). Also, If you read the latest >ccc opinion poll, it appears that the enlightened majority of the readers of >this group hold the same comps are GM strength. I think that the latest ccc poll is not what average chess players believe; all us programmers here are fans of computers, and of course think they are GM strength! Personnaly, I do not believe computers are GM strength-yet. Wait another 6 months, when some new Pentium 966 chip comes out, and then computers can claim to be grandmaster.
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.