Author: Shaun Graham
Date: 13:20:50 08/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 16, 1998 at 12:43:23, James Robertson wrote: >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. You think International master Larry Kaufman is an "average chess player"???? Further, the most staunch resistance to programs being grandmasters has come from computer programmers! I expect this is because they seem to magnify the weaknesses of the programs because they can see what those weaknesses are, yet they fail to take in to consideration, firstly the results, and secondly they seem to think that it takes a perfect knowledge of Chess to be a GM as if GM's have no weakneses. If Tal had a considerably worse positional eye(don't go crazy there are limits to how much worse), it could be argued he would still have been a GM. Further Many of them want to make a comparison with really strong GMs as opposed to the bottom of the barrel 2500 rated GM. I spoke to another I.M last night on ICC "Vassilli", i asked him point blank "are top commercial programs GM strength?" he said "yes!". In fact even Ed Shroeder programmer of Rebel, himself in a recent post stated, that he had in the past thought that many of the wins of the past had been flukes! Alas even he has finally started change his mind and simply accept the evidence before him.
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.