Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:48:51 09/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2002 at 11:26:35, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 09, 2002 at 11:04:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 09, 2002 at 09:19:56, Alexander Kure wrote: >> >>>On September 09, 2002 at 08:59:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>[..] >>> >>>>I don't agree. I _knew_ Tinsley. He played many checkers matches in Petal >>>>Mississippi (at the world checker hall of fame) about 5 miles from my office >>>>at the University of Southern Mississippi. Marion also played _many_ games >>>>against Cray Blitz (he was an avid chess-player also) including one marathon >>>>match where he was _sure_ he could beat it playing the "fried liver". He never >>>>won or drew a game. :) >>>> >>>>He was convinced beyond a shadow of doubt that The final Chinook was better >>>>than he was, because of the big endgame tables they had constructed. >>> >>>[..] >>> >>>Maybe Tinsley changed his mind after Chinook wasn't able to win any game in the >>>2nd match ;-) >>> >>>Greetings >>>Alex >> >> >>No, he specifically resigned because he was _certain_ they were better and >>he was going to be unable to continue the match to let that be seen. About >>as good a show of sportsmanship (and friendship to the Chinook group) as >>anything you might see... > >I do not see how he could be sure about it when all the games before he resigned >were drawn. you can't play a chess player, draw 6 games, but _know_ you are outclassed in every way and that any single mistake will result in a loss? While if you play perfectly you may draw? He followed the reasoning that "meat makes mistakes" because he _knew_ it... And he was't computer-ignorant either, having worked with the Chinook guys a long time... > >It is clear that he was unable to continue the match but it does not mean that >he had no chances to beat the thing in that match in case that he could >continue. All I can do is rely on his honest judgement of that fact. Before he started the match, he already knew he could not win it, from past games and new developments in the endgame stuff. > >I remember that I read the result 2-1 and 67 draws for the computer in checkers. > >I am not sure if this was the result of chinook against the second player but if >it was the result of chinook against the second player after tinsley had to stop >the match then it is possible to imagine that tinsley could avoid the losses and >beat the thing 1-0 with 69 draws. > >Uri 2 - 67 - 1 is not an uncommon result in checkers for anyone playing the very top players.
This page took 0.01 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.