Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:14:55 02/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2003 at 06:46:33, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On February 15, 2003 at 22:17:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 15, 2003 at 14:52:10, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>On February 15, 2003 at 14:34:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>> Answer me this, What Difference Does it make if you play more >>>>>positional chess, if you cannot defeated me?? >>>> >>>>If that were the case, I would agree. But by the same token, do you want >>>>your program to play 30 brilliant moves and one lemon move, over and over? >>>>That one lemon will drag your performance _way_ down at the top of the rating >>>>scale. >>> >>> >>>Bob, may I point out with humility that this is exactly my weak-chain argument? >>>Finally we are on the point. Did you ever reflect what would happen if >>> >>> - in a really recompensating money atmosphere and >>> >>> - after top players adopted specific comp related chess? >>> >>>And that on the base of a known permanent weakness? >>> >>>That is the point. And not the typical hype based on show events /commercials. >>> >>>What is you impression with the GM play on ICC? But note, Roman D. had to face >>>an always changed version [on the base of his own hints]. Guess what will happen >>>if several top GM work hard on a counter strategy against comps, in other words >>>if GM adopt 'Eduard'... >>> >>>Only then, and that is my argument since long, the actual commercial progs begin >>>to SUCK. But on a permanent base! >>> >>>My questions to Amir went a bit in the same direction. Let's see how far the >>>experts can open their mind. >>> >>>Rolf Tueschen >> >> >>The question is "too hard" for someone that is _not doing this_. IE who can >>say what a top GM player would do when folks start waving a million bucks >>around? IE would he try to stomp the program and end the matches for years? >>Would he intentionally "play down" to guarantee another million dollar match >>next year? >> >>I'm not capable or qualified to answer that... >> >>And anything I might say would be absolute 100% speculation. > > >But - you are qualified enough, perhaps the best qualified in the field, to >judge the actual strength of the progs in relation to GM and their chess. Say, >the GM would run wild and were determined to kill, would they succeed or not, >that is the question, NOT would they really want that or would they do it. > >I know the answer from all what you said. But you want to hide it? For what >sensible goal? Do you want to avoid the deception of computerchess lovers >worldwide? Or don't you want to harm the future show events? > > >Rolf Tueschen The answer is "none of the above." I'm not willing to speculate about things that I ultimately have no way of proving. IE how can I prove what he was thinking and what his motivation was? And without any way to prove/disprove anything, I don't see how my comments could help, although they could certainly hurt.
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.