Author: Chris Carson
Date: 09:57:24 02/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2003 at 12:28:12, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On February 07, 2003 at 12:04:34, Uri Blass wrote: > >>If it is possible for 2700 GM's(lower rated than kasparov) only to get the same >>result then it supports the theory that DJ is a super-GM. > >Obviously. > >>If you think about 2500-2600 players then one that can get 50% is not enough >>to say that DJ is not a super GM and you need to see if all can get average of >>50% in order to say that Junior is somewhere between strong IM and Decent GM. > >There's no reason to state the obvious. I assume that if one or two are capable, >then a significant subset is capable as well. The exact percentage is unclear >and rather difficult to establish. This is what makes it an opinion as opposed >to indisputable fact. If you have a different opinion, then fine, but please >refrain from stating chicken logic. Thanks in advance. > >Regards, >Mogens Lower rated players (2497 to 2698) loose against slower hw and older versions, the prog/comps have 25 wins, 30 draws, 10 loses. Hardware was 266 Mhz to 4x500 Mhz. The programs were Chess Tiger, Fritz, Junior, Rebel and Hiarcs. The results improve (higher percentage wins) in favor of the prog/comps as the human ratings drop. I have the data. It is public knowledge. Only GM's rated 2700 to 2840+ have drawn matches against the prog/comps on hw faster than 2Ghz. I see support for the Super GM (2700+) case, I do not see any data/results for the below 2700 case that you state. This is a broad range of players and a large spread of ratings. Lots of games, some tournament and some matches. Best regards, Chris Carson
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.