Author: Mark Young
Date: 07:40:16 12/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 14, 2002 at 08:13:10, Drexel,Michael wrote: >On December 14, 2002 at 00:57:30, Mark Young wrote: > >>On December 14, 2002 at 00:10:39, Drexel,Michael wrote: >> >>>On December 13, 2002 at 22:33:50, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>What is the point of this line? Is not white lost with best play? Can you win >>>>with white if you play at 3 min a move or even at Game 30' on fast computer, not >>>>the out of date P 600 that was used? >>> >>>Yes, white is lost in nearly every variation. >>>The point is: Fritz 8 has to play the variation with highest score. He sees no >>>danger because mating threats are behind his horizon. >> >>What value is this...dumbing down a computer program so someone can post a >>"Dream game" seems silly. Are we going to be wow'ed by this....I think not. >> >>If Fritz 8 plays this way with standard time controls this would have some >>value. >> >>This is nothing more then a time blunder by Fritz 8 because of the fast time >>control and the very slow computer that was used, not a flaw in the program. >> >>Can anyone produce a game where Fritz 8 plays this way at 3 mins. a move. >> >I dont agree. >1. An Athlon XP2000+ running at full speed is not a slow computer. Of course >there are faster comps available now for average home users. >2. A top program should be able to win after Bf7+ even with 1+1 min time >control. The position is completly lost for white. >3. I produced a game where Fritz 8 plays this way at 5+2 min (Fischer mode) for >the game. Im sure that it is possible to find other examples at 3 min a move but >probably very time consuming. >4. Dont forget. Even the top-programmers accept blitz games today. There had >been a World Blitz Championship taken place this year, won by Shredder. I don't accept Blitz chess as "Real Chess". It is not the same thing as slow chess. I don't think many programmers are going to fundamentally change the way they program chess programs, because the above example is not a "real problem". > >As long as computers play chess without artificial intellligence, it will be in >principle possible to beat computers this way. Nowadays it is not easy to >exploit this weaknesses due to the horizon-effect. King saftey has much improved >during the last years. You have to offer the programs high material advantages. >Most of the known examples are constructed. You have to try out hundreds of >stupid (for humans) variations with Fritz analysing in background to find a new >one. This is my point....some people act as if they are showing us something. They are not doing this over the board or in a real game. It is a made up game, they play crazy lines at very fast time controls until they work out a win. Then then come onto CCC and present us with bull shit as if they played this over the board and out of the blue, and tell us it a "dream game". Any jack ass can do this, and it is a waste of space.
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.