Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:43:01 10/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 2002 at 12:56:51, Dana Turnmire wrote: >On October 15, 2002 at 12:52:41, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 15, 2002 at 12:51:03, Dana Turnmire wrote: >> >>>On October 15, 2002 at 12:43:12, Anson T J wrote: >>> >>>>Its obvious a game such as chess is suited for a computer... in the future the >>>>comps will get better and better. Try making a computer that writes music or a >>>>good novel... >>> >>>Or how about letting chess computers play games from scratch with no humans >>>playing the openings moves for it. How many years would it take for them to >>>master the top grandmasters in that scenerio? >> >>I think that machines can get similiar performance in shuffle chess against >>humans when there is no opening theory. >> >>Uri > >I'm not talking about shuffle chess but classical chess where opening theory is >well established. The opening traps set for unwitting computer opponents would >it seems be overwhelming. I think that if the claim is that the asvantage of the computers are in their big opening then playing shuffle chess is a solution. Note that I also do not think that opening book are very important. You can look at the results of List4.61 with no opening book and learn that opening book are not very important and their main importance against humans may be only to avoid prepared traps that were discovered after a long analysis of humans(not traps that you can expect humans without previous knowledge about the position to find in few minutes). Uri
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.