Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 12:40:00 01/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 29, 2003 at 11:45:26, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On January 28, 2003 at 15:11:42, Sandro Necchi wrote: > >>On January 28, 2003 at 08:18:40, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On January 28, 2003 at 01:10:48, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>> >>>>On January 27, 2003 at 19:22:19, andrew tanner wrote: >>>> >>>>> There seems to be no basis for this belief other than DEEP BLUE and it's >>>>>legacy, which is a legacy of "the sky is falling" type of despair. If computers >>>>>continue to improve tactically, then GM's will learn from them and also improve >>>>>tactically. Man has always improved in everything he does. Accelerated rates of >>>>>improvement for chess computers with faster hardware or knowldege doesn't >>>>>automatically translate into wins against strong GM's. Bring it on. >>>>> >>>>> -A.T. >>>> >>>>Hi, >>>> >>>>I do not agree. >>>> >>>>I think with the right approch and a fast hardware Shredder can win the match >>>>also now if we were allowed to. >>>> >>>>Sandro Necchi >>> >>>Nonsense of course. Shredder is a too passive program for that. >> >>Well, cannot give info, but this is not true anymore... > >This is a contradiction. Well, you do make statements on what you know. I do on what you don't know. >I conclude falsum out of that. I conclude >out of that that it is too passive even when compared to DIEP, Fritz, >Yace, Gandalf, SOS, Pharaon, to perform at equal strength against humans. Well, it is not necessary true that to win against a human player it is necessary to play aggressive. It depends how strong you play the way you play. Very important is which openings you play and how good are the positions that arise from those openings for the program. I mean if the computer will understand them and play correctly. This is the real challenge as if the opening is not good enough for the program it would be enough that the opponent play a weaker move to put the program our of book and in trouble. > >Has nothing to do with how good shredder is in world champs. Of course. >It sits and waits there and opponents f' themselves and Shredder profits ( >junior sits too, but junior doing it in a way more active but anti positional >way). > >Shredder is easy to beat for a titled player who doesn't blunder away material. Well, what happen to the swiss team than? > >The others are a nightmare to beat because they play more active. If you kill them in the opening phase it will be a nighmare for the program... >Crafty lacks loads of knowledge, but it is at least also playing *active*; it >is in that respect also way harder to beat for a human than Shredder. I do not agree. Sorry. > >>With the std. passive style I would agree with you but there are other way to >>change things... >>I have been studying this for years and I was with MChess the first one to beat >>a GM at long time controls. 6 games (GM Igor Efimov). >>It was M-Chess 6.5 running on a 200 MHz Pentium MMX >> >>Believe, I know what I am saying. > >M-chess is not comparable with Shredder. Mchess is based upon things like >mobility. Shredder isn't. If it is inside shredder mobility, it will be >having a >minor score. Yes, this is true, but it is also true that Shredder is stronger. >Not saying that this is worse from objective viewpoint, but for >sure is having less of an impact against humans. I do not agree. I think Shredder can do quite well. Since you seems to know everything, do you know what GMs Shredder M3 is? I am referring to this program on my statements. You do not? > >M-Chess didn't have that problem, though of course software from around 96-97 >is completely outdated by todays standards. OK, but running on a slow hardware (Pentium 166 / Pentium Pro. 200 MMX) with a special book prepared by me scored 2589 Elo points against human players out of 19 games at long time controls (matches with games 1h time or longer for each player). > >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Vincent >> >>Best regards >>Sandro Best regards Sandro
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.