Author: Mark Young
Date: 14:47:55 06/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2003 at 08:46:35, Joachim Rang wrote: >On June 12, 2003 at 23:23:36, Mark Young wrote: > >>On June 12, 2003 at 22:55:18, Michael Vox wrote: >> >>>http://www.rediff.com/sports/2003/jun/12chessanand.htm >>> >>> >>>So are computers ruling the roost? >>> >>>At the moment it is pretty competitive. As far as I can tell, there has not been >>>a quantum leap in computer technology in the last 2-3 years. Earlier, it was >>>almost like Moore's Law, where the computer got stronger with every generation >>>of processor. But now the growth is much slower. It's not fifty points but now >>>it's 5-10 points. The Man versus Machine contests these days are pretty even. >>>Who knows what the future will bring, but at the moment it's 50-50. >> >> >>If it is even right now, 50-50 against the best players. Next year it will be >>52-48 for the computers even under your growth rate for chess computer elo. >> >>It is clear computers rule the roost. So unless a super Kasparov comes alone, >>you will not see any humans beating the best computer chess programs in a fair >>contest. Not to say humans will not win a game or two, but the longer the match >>the more advantage for the chess computer. >> >>Could you see a human playing the strongest chess computer under the old World >>Championship system...the first player to win 6 games wins the match, draws not >>counting. >> >>Brutal! > >I actually think, this would be not so hard for a human. It is very hard to win >against a computer but relatively easy to play for a safe draw. Even IM's do >this quite well against computers. The longer the match goes the better you can >spot the weaknesses of the program and try to win one or two games. Of course >the longer the match will continue the more the human becomes tired. > >regards Joachim From what we have seen in the Kramnik and Kasparov matches...The humans even the best become tired. Both Fritz and Junior came back to tie the matches after what would look like at first to be blow outs for the humans. This tells us that computers put a lot of stress on the human mind. As it was not the humans but the computers who seemed to play stronger as the match progressed. If draws don't count in the match. I could not see any human beating the best chess program, or at best the human has a very narrow window before the stress of trying to keep up with the computers fast, deep, and accurate tactical calculations takes it toll on the human mind.
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.