Author: andrew tanner
Date: 15:40:54 01/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
Strong chess computers seem to be training our greatest players to be even
better. What if Jose Capablanca or Paul Morphy had the luxury to have played
against silicon opponents? How might this have affected their development?
Capablanca was already considered the "chess machine". How much a factor did his
high level of confidence play in demoralizing his opponents? Would a chess
engine have tamed him?
Chess consists of nothing more than tactics. Researchers have guestimated
that a GM can cluster somewhere in memory 50,000 or so tactical positions. GM's
of the past had to painstakingly play out these positions and train on actual
chess boards whereas today's youth can view them with ease on a computer
monitor. Does this make todays players better or worse? Theoretically, computer
assisted chess training can familiarize a player with hundreds of thousands of
tactical positions (stored as .fen for instant recall). It is my belief that a
player with such training will emerge on the chess scene sometime soon and score
a rating higher than Kasparov's record.
The only issue is whether or not these computer "beasts" have made us a
little lazier! And my apologies to Kasparov fans who do not like my predictions.
-A.T.
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.