Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 08:36:55 06/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
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 Yes if you ask me they are ofcourse a rating of 2100 would be bezerk for computer programs in corspondence chess But you could play these games like Uri does for a higher rating then you would have with one program. (You always thought I did make my anelyzes in this way but that was a big mistake. I only used them for assistence I was depresive because I couldn' refind some of my anelyzes rember If it where computer moves than it wouldn't have been a problem And by luck my memory is not as good as that from a GM otherwise you could imagine I would have been nuts by now. by rembering all ecos till move 40 and above Though I doubt that a GM rembers realy everthing he has ever seen.) If it now would be corspondence players would play good games it would be totaly diferent But there are only few games on corspondence chess wich are of theoretical importance And most of them are from the pre computer time! Though still it is possible to outplay computer programs without being games of theoretical importance. It is wise to choose openings moves which are not used in the openings books Or only a few variations After which the programs might have difecultys finding a good strategic plan. actualy I already mentioned that the flaw of strategy in computerchess is most of time because of wrong evalution of mobilety. You might look at some postions of my analyzes which contain strategic plans which are not even considered by the programs of today. And nullmove is worse then Normal search of finding a strategic idea. Nullmove sometimes act's like it doesn't mather which move it plays. While there is only one way of strategy in the postion. It can be the difference between a win a draw or a loss in an endgame! And the diference between if you have to attack or defend in a midle game or opening. Or contineus attack or an attack resulting in an unclear postion. And again speed is not of real importance aslong as the knowledge is not big enough. when it finds it ok to have unmobilized pieces and neglect's mobilety It is only bashing harder against an emptyness . Infact computers should be superior in gambits especialy with longer time controls but it is just the opesite for most programs. Actualy I response in this way because I am busy building a sound openings book And reanelyze the postions with programs as asistence. And most of them are not always of much use. The anelyze I made about the Lion is good example of that. Marc
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.