Author: Peter Berger
Date: 13:47:59 05/23/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 23, 2003 at 14:58:39, Stephen Ham wrote: >It is my perception that most, if not all, of the top-rated CC players admit to >using chess engines in some way. As just one example, Tunj Hamarat, will >probably win the present World CC Championship. He admits to using a chess >engine(s). Kenneth Frey, an OTB IM and one of the highest rated ICCF players, >claims he has 7-computers running at any given time. > >Heck, if I had a chance to compete in a World Championship Final (I only played >in the Semi-Finals), I might use my computer too. > >So why do some computer using players succeed while most stay back in the pack? >I suspect that's where the difference is decided by who is the better human >player. A skilled human can direct the machine regarding where to focus its >computing power, thus being more successful than somebody totally dependent upon >having the machine find his/her moves. > Hi Steve, this is the optimistic view ( if you love correspondence chess). In case you were right it would mean that the better chessplayer would still win, only the game would be played on a much higher level - this could be a thrilling chess competition, too. I seriously doubt it is true though. First you use extremes here - you start with a human who is _totally_ dependent on the machine - will it still work just as nicely if the human is rated 2000 (which is still quite low) ? And then you assume that chess skill is the only variable here, but it definitely isn't. I hope Dieter Bürßner won't mind (too much) if I abuse him for an example - I don't know if you have seen some of his really _amazing_ analysis done with his own engine Yace posted here and in other fora. His human chess skills are quite low , but his knowledge about chessengines is _extremely_ high of course. He can use his own chessengine and he can even make special changes to it to improve on its analysis abilities in a given position. Although I doubt he is stronger than 1400 as a human player I would be _very_ scared if I had to compete with him in an analysis competition if we both could use chessengines. Of course this is an extreme example. Knowlegdge about chessengines is definitely a major factor in this kind of competition. I read some posts and articles by titled correspondence players that made me think it is not that common either, and that few people understand what an engine can do well and when you can't trust it at all, or better, often they seem to have only a very shallow understanding about the technical aspects. Of course a very strong chessplayer with a very good understanding of chessengines will still rule. But it looks more like a cyborg contest to me now .. As I am no strong correspondence player myself, this is of course partly based on pure speculation. But so far it is confirmed by my own experiences in a game against a very strong correspondence player that I am currently playing . My best, Peter
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.