Author: Andreas Guettinger
Date: 05:43:12 10/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 2002 at 08:25:48, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 25, 2002 at 08:04:37, Andreas Guettinger wrote: > >>On October 25, 2002 at 07:49:17, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On October 25, 2002 at 07:43:52, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >>> >>>>On October 25, 2002 at 07:12:38, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 25, 2002 at 06:51:45, Sune Fischer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 25, 2002 at 06:29:07, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>No >>>>>>>I did not think only about crafty. >>>>>>>There were other cases when programmers released versions with no improvement or >>>>>>>at least it is not clear if there was an improvement: >>>>>>>Gandalf,Nimzo,Mchess,Genius >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>> >>>>>>Based on eng-eng matches I guess. >>>>>> >>>>>>-S. >>>>> >>>>>I think that most people care only about them. >>>>>I do not care about games against humans because it is clearly only a question >>>>>of time until computers beat humans at all time controls. >>>>> >>>>>comp-comp is the interesting struggle and being better in comp-comp can also >>>>>help to get better results against humans. >>>>> >>>>>Computer also can play for the same ideas that humans play so being better at >>>>>beating them means in most cases also being better against humans. >>>>> >>>>>There are programs that can play for king attack and I do not think that you >>>>>need humans to see the problems of your program against king attack if you have >>>>>these problems. >>>>> >>>>>You can let your program play against sjeng. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>I disagree. Better performance in eng-eng matches is no guarantee that a >>>>programm performs better in matches against humans. >>>> >>>>And it leads the whole computer chess development into the false direction, >>>>with no new concepts. >>> >>>I see no reason why not. >>>New concepts can be productive to beat chess programs. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Look at the Kramnik-Fritz match games 2 and 3. In tactical positions, with lots >>of pieces and queens, chess engines are not bad today (and this is indeed an >>achievement of eng-eng matches). But in the other positions, the engines have >>not a clue, are chanceless, and this will not improve from eng-eng matches, >>because all the engines have this flaw. > >I do not think that all of them. >There are engines that do not play a3 in game 3. > >Other engines have different holes in their knowledge so I do not think that >Fritz has less knowledge than them. > >Uri I do. Fritz = fast, not much knowledge. Hiarcs8 = slooow, a lot of knowledge. Unfortunately, I don't own Fritz, so I can not prove that. But I think it's obvious, and nothing anybody will say will change my mind. :) Andreas
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.