Author: georges alain
Date: 05:24:43 06/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 2003 at 06:19:26, James T. Walker wrote: >On June 18, 2003 at 05:51:38, georges alain wrote: > >>On June 18, 2003 at 04:26:06, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On June 18, 2003 at 03:47:38, georges alain wrote: >>> >>>>On June 18, 2003 at 02:06:35, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 18, 2003 at 01:46:51, Peter Hegger wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hello, >>>>>>On very fast hardware with todays best programs, how would those programs fare >>>>>>in a round robin correspondence tournament playing exclusively against postal >>>>>>GMs? >>>>>>Even if they couldn't yet compete at this level, how far off is the day when >>>>>>they are bona fide postal GM strength? >>>>>>Opinions? >>>>>>Regards, >>>>>>Peter >>>>> >>>>>I believe that they can compete at this level. >>>>>GM's in correspondence chess are players who played well in the past relative to >>>>>their opponents. >>>>>It tells me nothing about their level relative to computers. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>GM's who got their rating not in the last years may be even weaker than >>>>>computers because they did not use fast hardware to get their rating. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>Not sure ! >>>>Christophe Léotard, better French ELO by correspondence, pulverized on 4 parts >>>>the softwares Hiarcs 7 and Chess Tiger 14 (+3=1-0). >>> >>>The hardware was not fast hardware and I think that at least Hiarcs chose bad >>>opening because of book. >>> >>>It is better if programs trust less the open library in that time control and >>>leave the opening book earlier. >>> >>> >>>>" The more time of reflexion is reduced, the less the man can compete. By >>>>correspondence, it is not rare to reflect 15 days on a position, to analyze >>>>alternatives which go from the opening to the finale. In addition, the human >>>>ones have a great advantage on the machines in the sense that their libraries of >>>>opening are largely higher, as well qualitatively as quantitatively. It is far >>>>from being the case with the clock. The world n°1 by correspondence, Timmerman, >>>>is classified 2734. It is established that the best machines do not exceed 2100 >>>>at rate correspondence, and I am perhaps still too generous." >>> >>>No >>> >>>Based on my experience it is not the case and I won a lot of 2500+ or 2400+ >>>players based on mainly computer moves. >>> >>>Steve Ham played against computers and lost 2.5-1.5 and he also did not play >>>against the best software and the best hardware of today. >>> >>>I expect 2600 player to beat 2100 player 4-0 in most of the cases so even the >>>3.5-.5 suggests that the programs are more than 2100. >>> >>>I do not understand french so I am not going to respond to the last comments. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Hello >> >>You are right if you speak about "chess with clock" but coresspondance chess are >>very different: no time pressure, no tactics tricks, possibility to check your >>opening line in an encyclopedia. or in database. >> >>Look for exemple a the last game of the match Junior-Kasparov. >>Kasparov was in a véry good position beut hard to win so he prefer to drawn the >>game and the match. Do you really think that kasparov would have draw this game >>in correspondance chess ? certainly not. >> >>please excuse my poor english >> >>Phili > >But would this position arise in corrrespondence chess? You talk of how >Kasparov would do better with more time but what about the computer? It's not >going to do better also? Another thing. You talk about the best chess player >in the world not just an ordinary GM. Why is it when people try to claim >computers are not GM level they always want to compare the the #1 rated player >when there are hundreds of GM players that computers beat easily. >Jim hello Computers don't do much better with more time , have you tried to replay the games of this match on your computer ? I do, with a computer wich is a least 10 x less faster, moves are often the same! . in the contrary With more time humans plays much, much better. When you can think about a move for 0ne or two weeks!!, moves pieces on the board, cheks your openings. your level of play increase dramatically. the match of kasparov was just an examplein the beginning I was talking about Christophe Léotard, wich is "just" the better French ELO by correspondence, not the world champion in correspondance chess but pulverized on 4 parts Hiarcs 7 and Chess Tiger 14 (+3=1-0)!!
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.