Author: Shaun Brewer
Date: 04:15:20 08/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 2003 at 06:51:19, Mark Young wrote: >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. Mark, Just one point, while I would agree that 'practising' against an opponent and then removing its learning or disabling learning is not fair. Analysing the games of an oppenent prior to a game is surely sensible preparation. Shaun > > >>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.