Author: Mark Young
Date: 03:51:19 08/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 2003 at 04:35:00, Janosch Zwerensky wrote: >On August 04, 2003 at 00:31:37, Mark Young wrote: > >>On August 03, 2003 at 18:30:50, Lei , Shiann-Tzong wrote: >> >>> >>>I can play a rated game with fritz 8 or junior 8 or Shredder 7 >>>and set it to the lowest rating . and win it many times a day . >>> >>>If you have a rating over 2400 elo , you can post your human vs machine games >>>here . >>>If not , don't post it . > >>I agree. >> >>It is a con job when people post games here showing wins over the top computer >>programs. > >I would not call for example the games Kurt Utzinger posted here, of which one >was a win against the machine, "con jobs". I think that at least these were >genuine, in the sense of not being the result of a lot of trial and error on >Utzinger's side. "I think that at least these were genuine, in the sense of not being the result of a lot of trial and error on Utzinger's side." WoW! What can I say to this....It is not a con job when they only cheat a little??? And post the game as a real win. You are more forgiving then I am...I am a tournament player, and rules of play mean things. It only takes 1 move to change the course of a game, so taking back only 1 time is cheating. Finding how a computer will responed in advance to a opening shot to probe for weakness is cheating. When you post the game on CCC as a true win. >If one plays ultra-solid chess and tries not to achieve anything beyond a draw, >quite often a top program will not try hard enough get into an unbalanced >position and the human, although a much weaker player than the program, will get >his draw (or even rarely win if horizon effect strikes on the computer side, or >more often lose, if the human misses some tactical shot). I am not sure that not >knowing the opening book used by the program will make much of a difference, >although I admitt that this is a real possiblity. >However, I also think that any player below master level would be dead meat >against the top programs no matter how they approached the problem if not only >the opening book but also the relevant parts of the evaluation function of a >strong program would be tuned in advance for anti-patzer-play. > >Regards, >Janosch
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.