Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:36:39 05/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 17, 2003 at 06:22:36, Mike S. wrote: >On May 16, 2003 at 07:56:44, Kurt Utzinger wrote: > >>Hi Mike >> >>I am somewhat. If I have interpreted your list correctly, there was only one >>games at 15m+10s. > >This is the output of ICC's "finger" command, available for all ICC members via >the URL above (gives up-to-date infos always). > >>This is not tournament level. But all other games were played >>at blitz level. And such things do not at all interest me. In this sense I >still believe that Rebel is the program to have played the most serious games >>vs human beings. > >But don't forget that strong human players, 2400+ including GMs, who play in the >ICC never will like to loose :-) not matter what time control it is. So I >wouldn't call those games unserious either... and most "anticomputer" ideas can >work at 15+ minutes per game (= standard server time controls) already, or even >on shorter times. So this provides certainly good analysis material to develope >"antihuman" elements in an engine. > >A major example: Crafty was the first engine IIRC to have "Anti Trojan" code. >Guess why :-)) I think that the idea of trojan horse sacrifice work more often in blitz and it is very hard to make it work in tournament time control. It means that the value of it at tournament time control is small and I even doubt if it has a positive value because humans can sacrifice wrong sacrifices when they know that the computer is not going to capture. I doubt if the value of short time control games is big in developing anti human strategies. It may lead to the wrong direction because computers can play in a style that humans have problem in blitz but no problem at tournament time control. Uri
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.