Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Unethical gamble with the psyche of Human chess players Part I

Author: Rolf Tueschen

Date: 02:49:18 10/10/02


On October 10, 2002 at 03:48:19, Ed Schröder wrote:

>After the first part of the match I had to do something, call it desperation. I
>activated a special option that focus on the clock of the opponent, that isplay
>fast (often instantly) when it is relative safe to do so. The effect it caused
>was the GM a) wasn't able to relax after his move and b) force him to think
>constantly all the time. This (playing fast) of course was not without risk but
>it worked well (especially when he was in time trouble at move 30-40) as the
>software responsible did well giving no errors.
>
>I have seen the psychological effect it caused on GM v/d Wiel and also on GMvan
>Wely, they had a hard time with this type of unusual play, it definitely put
>pressure on them and so I kept on using the system.
>
>Assuming the Fritz team doesn't have such an option they still out of ultimate
>desperation could try to play on 20-30 seconds average. Surely you would search
>1.5 to 2 plies less deep (not in the Permanent brain BTW) but the benefitscould
>be greater than the loss.
>

That will be topic for many discussions in future, but let me add a few first
remarks on the unbelievably ugly operator behavior. Chess, I'm talking about
human chess with its centuries long tradition, so with or without exact time
measurement, is a game of and for _gentlemen_! So, it's consense that chess
itself is the point. Both opponents try to create their "picture" of the
concrete chess situation. So by force this is also about the psyche of the two.
But the main point is the pressure you put into chess and then you influence the
opponents psyche. Now, what does that mean, what Ed thankfully has desribed
here?

Human chess players have played thousands of opponents and it's well known that
a real _master_ would never play the status of the opponent. He doesn't want to
win with bad tricks. I repeat even against weaker opponents a master will still
try to play a decent game of chess. Of course some blunders will end the game
and a master will always regret it (from the chess view).

Now we have show events between machines and such masters. More or less the
masters have adapted to the typical play of machines. They are better players.
They win. Now suddenly the operator of the machine gets depressive attacks. He
knows that his program is too weak to stand a real master. But he has still an
Ace in his sleaves. What if I change the machine's play into Blitz mode. Could
it be that over some two or three games the master might think by some hypnosis
factors that the fast play of the machine is possible because his own play had
changed to the worse?? Naaaaaah! Not in a life time! The master will think this:
Oh God, now Ed Schröder is in deep troubles. It seems as if he tried his final
trick! This is crazy. Is Rebel playing better in Blitz than in tournament mode?
Of course not.Am I, the master, so stupid to let me get into Blitz mode myself?
Of course not! I'm a master, a GM, and I know such tricks since the early youth.
And my trainer has always told me that I should always concentrate on the chess
on the board. And over many years I have concentrated on that attitude.
(Speculation mode ON: Ok, I see that Ed is now dying. Can I help him?Ok, I can
let him win some points and nobody would notice how I did it. I can oversee
certain things. I'm only human. If it helps Ed's psyche...)

Short NB: I won't discuss that. The wrong doing is so clear and obvious so that
I do not plan to even attack it. It's so ridiculous and mean. So that we don't
need further discussions.

[Part II is about the newest confessions of a second programmer, Bob Hyatt.]

Rolf Tueschen



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.